Saving Hidden CPs?

[Rodney]

I must be remembering incorrectly but...

 

I thought when we hid Control Points in a Model or Project and saved the files they remained hidden when the file was opened again.

Apparently I just imagined that because a test in an earlier version behaves the same as current version.

I must be thinking of Locking CPs.

 

Any thoughts or redirections?

I've been using hidden CPs in some experimenatal ways but if they return to visible state when a file is reopened (after saving) that defeats a key part of the experiment.

[robcat2075]

A work-around might be to

 

-hide all the CPs you want to hide

-select the CPs that remain visible

-unhide all CPs

-invert the selection (period key)

-name the inverted selection Group

-save the model

 

 

then when you later reload the model and need the CPs hidden

 

-select the Group

-period key

-H

[Rodney]

Yes, that's likely the workaround in the short term.

 

The simple setup that demonstrates the premise is a single CP controller...

 

a trivial example (click for animation):

[robcat2075]

Yeah, normally you can't have a single CP.

[detbear]

Yes....the hide feature is very useful, but cp's are visible again when you re-load the model.

Strangely enough the same is not true for "locked" cp's. If you lock a cp or group of cp's, they will

still be locked when you reload......That is if you saved the model with them locked.

[Rodney]

I ran an experiment with locked CPs that performed well but as I recall the main downside of that turned out to be that locking CPs is an all-or-nothing type of thing (as is hiding them).

In other words, let's say a series of CPs was locked and then a second series of other CPs is desired to be locked. In th proces of locking the second series the first gets unlocked.

I think the workaround at that time was to use mulitple models combined together in a Chor where dIfferent CPs were locked/unlocked in model.

Then just pretend they are all in the same model.

If theCPs were able to be locked in layers (levels?) that might have worked better but I can see how this could easily get out of hand with complex models..

 

I probably should log some kind of narrative that describes the purpose of the test because I don't have a clue what previous test was about.

These recent tests were an attempt to create quick controllers that are easy to access yet very hard (ideally impossible) to manipulate incorrectly.

 

I may have to revisit the multiple model angle again. It might be worth investigating that as Models can easily be Turned On/Off, Pickable/Unpickable, etc.

[robcat2075]

These recent tests were an attempt to create quick controllers that are easy to access yet very hard (ideally impossible) to manipulate incorrectly.

 

 

 

The current tactic of constraining bone controllers to limit their movement should be enough for that. What specifically do you need to do?

[Rodney]

What specifically do you need to do?

 

In that particular case the desire is to be able to always grab a Null (or whatever) and not have it activate rotation.

I note that even with limit manipulation settings set to only translate occasionally selecting them will rotate.

This can be seen in most face manipulation menus and I recall it happening a lot on characters from TWO when animating via face menu.

 

Perhaps it might be easier to ferret out why the controls allow for the behavior and submit that as a report but Nulls in general haven't satisfied the need.

A comparison of grabbing a single CP and moving that around (in any dimension) versus any other object will demonstrate the differences in precision.

This isn't to say that single CPs don't have their issues... sometimes they can be hard to click on individually and need to be marque selected (apologies if thats not the right term).

 

One of the benefits to CP controllers is they are trivial to create in just about any configuration.

I suspect that one of the reasons I like Point Controllers (Control Points that are controllers is that they always appear to face the user.

There are other reasons to like CPs (prefer them to Nulls, etc. that is)... for instance we can stick/project a bunch of them to a surface just by projecting them onto that surface.

[robcat2075]

In a quick test, i can't make a translate-only null go into rotation just by grabbing it. Is this something you can repeat?

[Rodney]

Is this something you can repeat?

 

I'll investigate. The short answer is 'yes' but the demonstrable answer is 'hmmm... now how did I do that again..."

 

Edit: Actually... it's easy to demo. If you accidentally select the roll handle of the Null then it will rotate.

This doesn't appear to happen upon first click but with a second click. I'll see if I can prevent it.

 

 

i can't make a translate-only null go into rotation just by grabbing it.

 

How are you creating your translate=-only Null?

I assume the Null is part of a Model because, unless I'm missing something, Nulls cannot be limited in such a way outside of a Model.

[robcat2075]

 

Is this something you can repeat?

I'll investigate. The short answer is 'yes' but the demonstrable answer is 'hmmm... now how did I do that again..."

 

Edit: Actually... it's easy to demo. If you accidentally select the roll handle of the Null then it will rotate.

This doesn't appear to happen upon first click but with a second click. I'll see if I can prevent it.

 

 

In a model... In the properties of a null I can set Manipulator Options>Manipulation to "Translate Only" and the roll handle will not appear no matter how many times I click

 

 

i can't make a translate-only null go into rotation just by grabbing it.

How are you creating your translate=-only Null?

I assume the Null is part of a Model because, unless I'm missing something, Nulls cannot be limited in such a way outside of a Model.

 

 

True, a Null by itself in a Chor doesn't have the same Manipulator Limits properties.

 

For a Null by itself in a Chor I can put a Spherical Limits constraint on it with Mins and Maxs all set to 0° and the Null will not be rotatable. (Rotation Keyframes will be created if you try to rotate it but no rotation motion will happen)

[Rodney]

I will guess that you are selecting the Null from the PWS listing?

 

 

Hmmm... I must confess that I am not smart enough to convey what I'm after here and a lot of this is due to my ignorance of the deeper side of Nulls, constraints, etc.

I obviously need to approach this from another angle.

 

Nulls have their uses but the elegance of manipulating a single CP is what I'm after.

 

As for the attached gif animation... um... er... I'm not sure what it represents.

It's just me moving a single CP around through time and space.

Not shown here: Unlike Nulls or Objects that have been constrained/limited in rotation or other orientation CPs always face the viewer so moving them in Z depth works just as well as X and Y without CP scaling or rotation.