Nice !
Thanks a lot Guy !
I remembered it was a VBScript somewhere but I couldn't find it !
On 19 December 2012 22:07, Guy Rabiller guy.rabil...@radfac.com wrote:
But I feel bad when I tell my riggers not to use a native command of
Softimage as simple as the MatchTransform.
Hey Jeremie,
I have noticed that when I try “match all transforms” on an object to
something parented to it(a child), it tends to fail quite a bit. It looks
like the rotation gets evaluated first and set, before the position. So the
final position is not the original position where the child was, but where
it
hi Jack,
Do you have a quick repro steps in 2013?
I have noticed that when I try “match all transforms” on an object to something
parented to it(a child), it tends to fail quite a bit. It looks like the
rotation gets evaluated first and set, before the position. So the final
position is not
Hi Chris,
Here are the quick repro steps demonstrating what I was saying...
Turn off child compensate.
Create two nulls, parent one(child) to the other(parent).
Set the global transforms of the child null to something like posy = 1,
rotx = 3.
Run match all transforms on the parent null to the
But I feel bad when I tell my riggers not to use a native command of
Softimage as simple as the MatchTransform.
Hey Jeremie,
As a temporary workaround you may edit the 'uixsiscrips.vbs' located in
Softimage \Application\DSScripts.
The MatchPoseProc( in_sel, io_pick, in_Type, in_Local
] On Behalf Of Jeremie Passerin
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:27 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Match Transform command in 2013 ? Does it work ?
Yeah I agree... That's something I have in my tool set too. Knowing that
the simple object oriented way is working just perfectly
:52 AM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: RE: Match Transform command in 2013 ? Does it work ?
Hi Jeremie,
Thanks so much. Just drop me an email once you have sent the bug or feature
request :D
Regards,
Chris
From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimage
Yep I reported the bug for 2013 and it was verified reproducible on
Autodesk'send. I can't find the bug number in my email history at the
moment, but I hope it gets fixed soon.
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Jeremie Passerin gerem@gmail.comwrote:
Anyone experimenting issue matching
ah good good,
ive been getting this a bunch lately in 2012.
matches positions but often neglects rotation.
Yeah that sounds like the bug we have too !
Good I'm not crazy. If someone has repro steps, I'll be happy to report it
once more to the Softimage Beta.
On 17 December 2012 14:29, Sam Cuttriss tea...@gmail.com wrote:
ah good good,
ive been getting this a bunch lately in 2012.
matches
There's an old bug when the rotation parameters have fcurves.
The OM way always works:
objA.Kinematics.Global.Trasnform = objB.Kinematics.Global.Transform
Cheers!
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Jeremie Passerin gerem@gmail.comwrote:
Yeah that sounds like the bug we have too !
Good
And it won't use a silly temp constraints methodology like the factory one
does (was that ever addressed?), which means it will work as expected with
constraint compensation on if the object is constrained, and won't suffer
from direction constraints taking precedence over pose ones.
The match
Yeah I agree... That's something I have in my tool set too. Knowing that
the simple object oriented way is working just perfectly with Child Comp,
Animation... That's a shame :(
But I feel bad when I tell my riggers not to use a native command of
Softimage as simple as the MatchTransform.
Also I
13 matches
Mail list logo
