Cheers, Ben. Good call - and no the mesh hasn't changed... but we want to steer completely clear of using anything that was involved in the previous setup.... call it superstition if you like but I don't want to risk adding anything that might have been involved in the initial corruption!
As it goes the setup looks better than before anyway - it pays to do things over and over even if it does leave you sobbing quietly over your keyboard in the early hours! *-- * *Jonny Grew Ltd * *www.Jonnygrew.com <http://www.Jonnygrew.com>* *http://vimeo.com/jonnygrew/showreel2013*<http://vimeo.com/jonnygrew/showreel2013> *07855 212722* Jonny Grew Limited is registered in England and Wales. Company number:07735521 VAT number: 122713057 This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Jonny Grew Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. On 5 November 2013 16:07, Ben Beckett <nebbeck...@gmail.com> wrote: > With the re grooming you could just save out your old weight maps and > reapply them > > Maybe as long as you have not edited the mesh! > > Ben > > > On 5 November 2013 15:41, Jonny Grew <jonny.g...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just thought I'd give you an update about this... >> >> Mr MB had a look at our scenes and encountered the same problem with >> reading the cache - the feather instances appeared on frame 1 but >> disappeared on subsequent frames. >> >> As there were some nested models under the main chicken model it was >> thought that there was confusion with ICE recognising certain elements of >> the setup... I ran a test by removing the nested models and there was no >> change - still a problem reading the cache. His suggestion was it was a >> soft cache reading error as it was a little sporadic with the errors we >> were getting. >> >> After much faffing and eliminating every conceivable thing from the list >> of things that could cause an issue we started over. Removed EVERYTHING >> other than the meshes to be surfaced with feathers. The feathers were >> remade and then I reapplied the rig with saved out envelope weights. So >> far so good. Maybe the issue was with the initial build of the feather >> system? No answer but problem solved. Although the re-grooming of the >> feathers obviously adds time, at least we have a setup that works including >> writing the cache out from referenced animation models and applying it to >> referenced render models. >> >> Thanks for your thoughts. >> >> Jonny >> >> >> >> On 4 November 2013 19:53, Sandy Sutherland <sandy.mailli...@gmail.com>wrote: >> >>> You might be right Jonny, been a while since I used it. I am sure you >>> can look see what attributes are being written and find the instance one - >>> it is most likely an integer that can then be fed into an instance node. >>> >>> S. >>> >>> >>> On 2013/11/04 9:01 PM, Jonny Grew wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The problem is, Sandy, that I cannot recreate the instancing section of >>>> the ice tree. The compound for MB feather tools is not explorable. You >>>> simply point it at an instance group but the allocation of each individual >>>> feather instance is defined by an envelope weight on a duplicate of the >>>> render mesh (called the envelope mesh) Under the hood this will give the >>>> particles a custom attribute (I'm guessing) that is used to inform which >>>> instance each particle should use-the same goes for size and rate but >>>> driven by a weight map that is local to the render mesh. Determining which >>>> attribute is being used and how is what I would need to know in order to >>>> use on a secondary ice tree by using the set instance geometry node in my >>>> 'cache read' particle cloud. >>>> >>>> MB looking at it but cache issue could be down to how the feather tools >>>> were set up originally or some kind of internal confusion due to the fact >>>> we have 3 separate feather tool setups all referencing the same instance >>>> feather group. >>>> >>>> Will report back when I know more. >>>> >>>> Jonny >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> >
