Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted March 24, 2009 Hash Fellow Share Posted March 24, 2009 Does anyone have a small example PRJ that shows a "surface constraint" in operation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted March 24, 2009 Author Hash Fellow Share Posted March 24, 2009 Never mind. I got it to work a bit. However, I'm finding the constrained object is following a jagged straight line path over the surface rather than following the actual surface curve. this is an onionskin screen shot Anyone know what's up with that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsjustme Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 It could be that the bone that contacts the surface loses contact? There's an old project that I put together here...it's a four-wheeled cart that uses surface constraints to keep the wheels on the ground. A better setup was put together by Mark Skodacek, here. Hope that helps, Robert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted March 25, 2009 Author Hash Fellow Share Posted March 25, 2009 It could be that the bone that contacts the surface loses contact? There's an old project that I put together here...it's a four-wheeled cart that uses surface constraints to keep the wheels on the ground. A better setup was put together by Mark Skodacek, here. Hope that helps, Robert. Thanks David, that's a neat set up. I'm not sure I can see it on yours, but I think the surface constraint really follows a four-subdivision-per-spline approximation of the surface rather than the actual patch surface. That's what the tests I've tried so far indicate. This is a bone following the surface of a 3-cross-section lathed cylinder edit: subdividing the cylinder into 16 sections didn't help. the constrained bone is still moving in straight line paths, about 4 sections per 90° turn. I'd be curious to see if anyone can load this test PRJ and get a different result. SurfConTest.zip Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve392 Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I gave it a go ,it seems like it bump's int something around every 20 frames ,but it still looks prety smooth,Don't supose this will help mpeg 4 btw test_R.mov Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Developer yoda64 Posted March 27, 2009 Developer Share Posted March 27, 2009 I'm not sure I can see it on yours, but I think the surface constraint really follows a four-subdivision-per-spline approximation of the surface rather than the actual patch surface. That's what the tests I've tried so far indicate. It's fixed for V15.f Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hash Fellow robcat2075 Posted March 27, 2009 Author Hash Fellow Share Posted March 27, 2009 I'm not sure I can see it on yours, but I think the surface constraint really follows a four-subdivision-per-spline approximation of the surface rather than the actual patch surface. That's what the tests I've tried so far indicate. It's fixed for V15.f Cool! I was thinking I might be crazy. The thing I thought was really odd was that increasing the patch density didn't reduce the straightline jagginess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. 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.