DeeJay Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Hi! I'd like to constrain a bone with the "orient like" constrain to another bone but with more "enforcement" then 100%. Is it possible that a bone moves twice the speed (or anything higher than 100%) than it's "parent"? I bet it can be done with an expression, but that's a locked book for my brain ... Cheers, David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Hi! I'd like to constrain a bone with the "orient like" constrain to another bone but with more "enforcement" then 100%. Is it possible that a bone moves twice the speed (or anything higher than 100%) than it's "parent"? I bet it can be done with an expression, but that's a locked book for my brain ... Cheers, David Isn't that like going faster then light? How can it get there faster when it won't yet know 'where' to get to? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trajcedrv Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 I don't think that could be possible with plain constraints... (not sure, though) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zandoriastudios Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 that's like saying "infinity+1"... if a bone is oriented exactly like another bone (100%), what do you mean when you say you want it MORE oriented?! Either you don't understand what "orient like" means, or you don't understand what "100%" means. Perhaps you could write down or diagram precisely what you are trying to do and why. then we could perhaps be able to help you do it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3DArtZ Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Expression is the way to go here I'm thinking. But, it won't go anywhere 2xtimes as fast, until the target bone starts moving. I wonder what you're trying to do here.... Mike Fitz www.3dartz.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJay Posted October 26, 2006 Author Share Posted October 26, 2006 Ok, I'll clarify this. Take the picture below, the blue bone is "orient like"-constrained to the red one. To achieve this kind of acceleration its "orient like" must be higher than 100% (something like "take the orient like value and multiply this with 2"). Another way to get it is to constrain the red bone to the blue bone with 50% (and some help of another bone) but this becomes unhandy for me. Cheers, David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3DArtZ Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 DeeJay, I understood what you were saying from the begining, but after reading what you posted above, I'm still in the dark on what you are trying to do. What would you use the set up for? Mike Fitz www.3dartz.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJay Posted October 26, 2006 Author Share Posted October 26, 2006 That's top secret! I just implemented a TSM spine for the Jimbo model (aka The Snake) but the head-movement needs to be boosted. That's what I'm looking for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNGLAUBLICHUSA Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 <_ i think see what is meant. for every millimeter move bone want child to millimeters. correct> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJay Posted October 26, 2006 Author Share Posted October 26, 2006 Correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNGLAUBLICHUSA Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 <_ sehr gut i am making no gaurantee but will see if can figure it out.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsjustme Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 To be fair, I don't know much about the TSM rig...but, it sounds like you're attacking something from the wrong direction. --------------------- EDIT --------------------- Maybe an example model would better illustrate what you're after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNGLAUBLICHUSA Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 I just can't formulate the correct expression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3DArtZ Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 Just to clarify what I was saying.... I totally understand what the goal of getting the bones to is..... But what I don't understand is why you would want to implement this action. What is it that it will accomplish? What behaviour are you trying to achieve. For everyone movement of the parent bone, the constrained bone will do it by a factor of 2. Why are you trying to do this? Knowing that might help us help you..... Mike Fitz www.3dartz.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted October 26, 2006 Hash Fellow Share Posted October 26, 2006 Maybe what you are seeking would be better described as "rotate like" rather than orient like since, as noted above, nothing can be more than 100% oriented to a target, but the target's rotations could be multiplied by any factor. But there is no "Rotate like" in A:M except for on the Z axis ("Roll Like"). People have used that to mimic the interaction of different sized gears that must rotate at certain ratios. Is there a reason expressions for X Y and Z rotation wouldn't do it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pengy Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 total shot in the dark,but, shouldn't it be the opposite to what you propose? the child bone starts of 100 percent orientated like the parent,then decreases as it moves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rusty Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 For Bone1 (you move this one) and Bone2 (Bone1 moves this via formula)… you want to… Bone2's Y rotation to equal Bone1’s Y rotation plus some percentage (using 33% or .3) of Bone1’s Y rotation. or Formula written out: Bone2’s translate, rotate, Y axis = Bone1’s translate, rotate, Y axis + (Bone1’s translate, rotate, Y axis * .3) or (actual formula) ..|..|..|..|Bone1.Transform.Rotate.Y+(..|..|..|..|Bone1.Transform.Rotate.Y*0.3) In an action click on Bone2's translate, rotate, Y and select edit formula, click on Bone1's translate, rotate, Y to put this into the formula add '+ (' after this then click on Bone1's translate, rotate, Y to put this into the formula again) then add '* .3 )' and Bob's your Uncle! Rusty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNGLAUBLICHUSA Posted October 26, 2006 Share Posted October 26, 2006 <_ yeah what he said.> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJay Posted October 27, 2006 Author Share Posted October 27, 2006 Looks good! Thanks, I'll try it ... David Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfree68f Posted October 27, 2006 Share Posted October 27, 2006 or you could just set up a smartskin or relationship that positions bone A where you want based on bone B ;-) You'd just have to make it work for as much rotation as you want from bone B. No math required, although I Love math. You may want to only move bone A 179 degrees for 90 degrees of B so it always takes the right path to the solution.. otherwise it might move backwards to bone B, which could be another neat trick I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobcroucher Posted October 31, 2006 Share Posted October 31, 2006 Hi DeeJay, The expressions as Rusty showed should do the trick. Orient Like is written for arbitrary rotations, so it doesn't support the concept of rotating more than another bone. As mentioned earlier by Robert though, Roll-Like constraint only works on the Z axis of a bone, but it has a scale-offset option which permits it to scale its own roll based on the target bone's roll. This can be used to reverse the rotation direction, shrink or expand the rotation. It was really intended for gears and such, but with careful parenting and orientation you could use it in a neck/head as well. Collin's idea of using a relationship to do this is also a good one. You have total freedom in how you design the motion relationship between the two bones. It doesn't even have to be linear. On top of that it doesn't require any equations or confusing numbers. Just pose the controlling bone, then pose the controlled bone, then test in an action window, and iterate if necessary. Thanks for the brain teaser, and good luck, Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeJay Posted November 14, 2006 Author Share Posted November 14, 2006 Rusty, works fine! Thanks for all helpers here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.