Isn't the Ice-Syflex faster than the "legacy" Syflex ?
Le 22/06/2012 17:37, Adam Sale a écrit :
I put in a request for per point control in the last beta.. I hope the
devs prioritize this one, because realistically, without ICE syflex,
the internal options aren't all that appealing OTB.
We still obviously have legacy Syflex, but the ICE framework for
Syflex was such a big step forward in terms of simplification..
Please, Please, please... Per point control... .V. 2014.
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Dan Yargici <danyarg...@gmail.com
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Matt.
In my experience Lagoa, for all it's cool potential, is just sooo
slow and unstable.
On the last job I did I went through Lagoa, Momentum and Syflex.
Lagoa was dropped very early on because of it's instability.
Momentum is great but has the limitation I mention in this thread.
Syflex handles that limitation with ease and is also amazingly
fast and robust. But ultimately it's a poisoned chalice as it
gives you no control whatsoever other than 'wind' or 'damp'...
Basically Syflex speaks in caveman terms when it comes to simulation!
DAN
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Matt Morris <matt...@gmail.com
<mailto:matt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Have you thought about lagoa cloth? Setup is a bit finnicky
but I have had some decent results and has all the point
control you could ask for.
I completely second what you're saying about syflex ice
integration though, it sucks big sucky balls.
On 22 June 2012 14:18, Dan Yargici <danyarg...@gmail.com
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Just want to add that due to this limitation I moved back
to Syflex but the lack of per-point control in Ice Sylfex
is INFURIATING! it renders %90 of what Ice is good for
TOTALLY AND UTTERLY redundant.
I know there have been discussions mentioning that there
were reasons it couldn't be implemented for Ice Syflex,
but I'd really like to hear them. Right now I'm just
calling it out as laziness...
Having a bad day right now.
DAN
On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Leo Quensel <le...@gmx.de
<mailto:le...@gmx.de>> wrote:
While we are at it:
Are there any news of 'Keep shape updated' with
GImpact actual shape?
Last time I needed this I ran into a wall because
bullet didn't support it.
Cheers,
Leo
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
> Datum: Tue, 19 Jun 2012 14:08:57 +0100
> Von: Helge Mathee <helge.mat...@gmx.net
<mailto:helge.mat...@gmx.net>>
> An: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
> Betreff: Re: Calling all Momentum experts!
> Sure, find it here.
>
>
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/b55evi388oezwrt/MOM_collision_issue.scn?dl=1
>
> Note that I am using the convex hull collision shape
though. Bullet
> Physic's
> GImpact collision configuration doesn't support
collision against
> softbodies, which
> means that your scenario won't be possible other
than decomposition.
>
> This feature has just been added to the latest
version of Bullet
> Physics, and
> hasn't been implemented in Momentum yet.
>
> Bullet hasn't been built for this kind of scenario,
so I think you are
> hitting
> an edge case here.
>
> -H
>
> On 6/19/2012 13:03, Dan Yargici wrote:
> > Thanks Ben, I actually posted to the
Momentum-Users group last night
> > but it told be I had to wait to have my post
approved....
> >
> > Would mind sharing with me a scene you have where
this works?
> >
> > DAN
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 2:45 PM, Ben Houston
<b...@exocortex.com <mailto:b...@exocortex.com>
> > <mailto:b...@exocortex.com
<mailto:b...@exocortex.com>>> wrote:
> >
> > I had a quick look, but I'm actually not a
Momentum expert in terms
> of
> > usage. It should all be possible because all
collision items are
> put
> > into the same Bullet space.
> >
> > I figure your setup should just be a Momentum
Passive Rigid Body on
> > the sphere. When I tried to do that I got
this message:
> >
> > # WARNING : 3000 - **** Cycle breaking point
> > sphere.kine.global.MomentumKinematics
> > # WARNING : 3000 - Cycle through
sphere.polymsh.clsctr
> > # WARNING : 3000 - Cycle through
> sphere.kine.global.MomentumKinematics
> > # WARNING : 3000 - PROBLEMATIC EVALUATION
CYCLES ARE IN THE
> > SPECIFIED GRAPH
> > # WARNING : 3000 - **** Cycle breaking point
> > sphere.kine.global.MomentumKinematics
> > # WARNING : 3000 - Cycle through
sphere.polymsh.clsctr
> > # WARNING : 3000 - Cycle through
> sphere.kine.global.MomentumKinematics
> > # WARNING : 3000 - PROBLEMATIC EVALUATION
CYCLES ARE IN THE
> > SPECIFIED GRAPH
> >
> > If I add another object into the scene and I
add a Momentum Passive
> > Rigid Body operator on it seems to work. Just
check "Keep Shape
> > Updated" if the object is deforming.
> >
> > Just be aware that there are +250 people on
the Momentum user's
> > list here:
> >
> > https://groups.google.com/group/momentum-users
> >
> > -ben
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:40 AM, Dan Yargici
<danyarg...@gmail.com <mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>
> > <mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > > One final caveat... it needs to be an Actual
Shape collision
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Dan Yargici
> > <danyarg...@gmail.com
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com
<mailto:danyarg...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Here is a small quicktime of the setup if
you just want to take
> > a quick
> > >> look and get an idea of what I mean.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Ben Houston
> > Voice: 613-762-4113 <tel:613-762-4113>
<tel:613-762-4113 <tel:613-762-4113>> Skype: ben.exocortex
> > Twitter: @exocortexcom
> > http://Exocortex.com - Passionate CG Software
Professionals.
> >
> >
>
--
Empfehlen Sie GMX DSL Ihren Freunden und Bekannten und wir
belohnen Sie mit bis zu 50,- Euro!
https://freundschaftswerbung.gmx.de
--
www.matinai.com <http://www.matinai.com>
