Hi Jack,

thanks, but that was still giving odd results. I have adjusted the CoM a bit more (linked to an axis for better control and that seems to give the expected result):

set cut_paste_input [stack 0]
version 6.3 v8
push $cut_paste_input
Cube {
 cube {-0.2 -0.2 -0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2}
 translate {0 -0.5 0}
 rotate {35.26261719 0 0}
 pivot {0 0.5 0}
 name torso1
 selected true
 xpos 21
 ypos -130
}
J_MulletBody {
 bodydamping {0.09 0.09}
bodycenterofmass {{parent.Axis1.translate x1 0} {parent.Axis1.translate x1 -0.1679999977} {parent.Axis1.translate x1 -0.1099999994}}
 bodycenterofmassoverride true
 labelset true
 name J_MulletBody6
 label "\[value this.bodytype]-\[value this.coltype]"
 selected true
 xpos 21
 ypos -72
}
J_MulletConstraint {
 conbodycount One
 conbodypreview true
 labelset true
 name J_MulletConstraint1
 label "\[value this.contype]"
 selected true
 xpos 21
 ypos -22
}
J_MulletSolver {
 name J_MulletSolver1
 selected true
 xpos 21
 ypos 45
}
Axis2 {
 inputs 0
 translate {0 -0.4 -0.29}
 name Axis1
 selected true
 xpos 197
 ypos -99
}




On 17/08/12 7:34 PM, Jack Binks wrote:
Hey Gents,

Will have to investigate further, but I think what you're seeing is
related to the auto calculated center of mass. Does the below
amendment make it more what you expect (body has CoM overriden)?

set cut_paste_input [stack 0]
version 6.3 v1
push $cut_paste_input
Cube {
  cube {-0.2 -0.2 -0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2}
  translate {0 -0.5 0}
  rotate {35.26261719 0 0}
  pivot {0 0.5 0}
  name torso1
  selected true
  xpos -224
  ypos -283
}
J_MulletBody {
  bodydamping {0.09 0.09}
  bodycenterofmass {0.15 -0.5 -0.4}
  bodycenterofmassoverride true
  labelset true
  name J_MulletBody6
  label "\[value this.bodytype]-\[value this.coltype]"
  selected true
  xpos -224
  ypos -225
}
J_MulletConstraint {
  conbodycount One
  conbodypreview true
  labelset true
  name J_MulletConstraint1
  label "\[value this.contype]"
  selected true
  xpos -224
  ypos -175
}
J_MulletSolver {
  name J_MulletSolver1
  selected true
  xpos -224
  ypos -108
}

Cheers
Jack

On 16 August 2012 23:41, Marten Blumen <[email protected]> wrote:
that's what I got- I couldn't solve it properly before the deadline. It
appeared to be some combination of the initial object position and the
constraint axis.

luckily this fit my shot. karabiners can shift within the bolt hanger when
attached to the rock wall- it added to the realism!


On 17 August 2012 10:18, Frank Rueter <[email protected]> wrote:
I just had a play with this sort of simple constraint as well and am not
getting the exected result (the box is not swinging around the constraint
point.
Am I doing something wrong?


Cube {
  cube {-0.2 -0.2 -0.2 0.2 0.5 0.2}
  translate {0 -0.5 0}
  rotate {35.26261719 0 0}
  pivot {0 0.5 0}
  name torso1
  selected true
  xpos -464
  ypos -197
}
J_MulletBody {
  bodydamping {0.09 0.09}
  labelset true
  name J_MulletBody6
  label "\[value this.bodytype]-\[value this.coltype]"
  selected true
  xpos -464
  ypos -139
}
J_MulletConstraint {
  conbodycount One
  conbodypreview true
  labelset true
  name J_MulletConstraint1
  label "\[value this.contype]"
  selected true
  xpos -464
  ypos -89
}
J_MulletSolver {
  name J_MulletSolver1
  selected true
  xpos -464
  ypos -22

}




On 17/08/12 9:03 AM, Marten Blumen wrote:

Cool - I had about 12-16 of them swinging on a wall. modeled and painted,
6 hero ones and the rest in the distance.

I had to bodgy the whole thing, didn't have time to learn it and the
looming  shot deadline.

Would really like to have a RBD rope, split into segments, pullling at
them to make them move.



On 17 August 2012 08:52, Jack Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
Cracking, thanks Marten, will have a play!


On 16 Aug 2012, at 19:48, Marten Blumen <[email protected]> wrote:

Yeah - its an awesome bit of kit to have in the Nuke toolbox. Concept
attached.

The shot was a bit dead so I wanted to add sun glints off karabiners
swinging on the wall. I could have animated it by hand but no need now!

Super simple / amazing to be able to do it in Nuke.

On 17 August 2012 06:35, Jack Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
Sounds great + completely understand.
Still, first production use I know of :)
Cheers
Jack

On 16 August 2012 18:35, Marten Blumen <[email protected]> wrote:
Would love to but can't yet. I'll make a test shot when I get the
chance.


On 17 August 2012 05:10, Jack Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
Cool stuff Marten, would love to check it out if you can share?
Cheers
Jack

On 15 August 2012 21:55, Marten Blumen <[email protected]> wrote:
Awesome Jack.

Already used it to finish a shot - simulating rock climbing
karabiners
hanging on a rock face - just the extra zing the shot needed!


On 10 August 2012 19:55, Jack Binks <[email protected]> wrote:
Hey All,

Just to let you know I've popped a 2.0 build of J_Ops for Nuke 6.3
up
on Nukepedia, adding a rigid body physics toolkit for Nuke's 3D
system, as well as a range of tweaks, improvements and fixes to
the
existing tools.

Check out the dev blog for more info:
http://major-kong.blogspot.com/

Enjoy!
Jack
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected],
http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/

http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users


_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected],
http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users


_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

<KarabinerTest.nk>

_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users


_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users



_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users



_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users


_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users


_______________________________________________
Nuke-users mailing list
[email protected], http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/
http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users

Reply via email to