Boom! Frank lays down the challenge.

AK has been crashing out on me; trying to get some rad reflections between
the billiards / hopefully v1.2 helps - I read it's coming out after
Siggraph.

On 22 August 2012 17:05, Frank Rueter <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On 22/08/12 12:07 PM, Frank Rueter wrote:
>
> Yup, after my initial mail I noticed that Nukepedia had generated a link
> with the extra "gizmos" in it, so I fixed it on the Nukepedia side and
> re-posted the new link.
>
>
> On 22/08/12 12:00 PM, Jason Huang wrote:
>
> Frank the link you put threw a 404 error for me. The below cut it for me.
> http://www.nukepedia.com/toolsets/j_mullet-pooltable/
>
>  On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Frank Rueter <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the info.
>>
>> I've uploaded a Toolset to Nukepedia with a basic pool table setup
>> (thanks Jack for helping set this up):
>> http://www.nukepedia.com/gizmos/toolsets/j_mullet-pooltable/
>>
>> Quite fun to play with
>>
>>
>> On 22/08/12 5:31 AM, Jack Binks wrote:
>>
>>> I suspect it's to do with the constraint auto calced center being
>>> incorrect vs that used by the solver down the stream (doesn't
>>> necessarily know some of the aspects the solver does). So it's likely
>>> a bug somewhere - I'll need to have a more in depth look when I get a
>>> chance, but fortunately there's a usable workaround.
>>> In terms of a display, it's a good idea (thanks Ivan), particularly if
>>> I can't figure the issue out. In the meantime, it's mainly of issue
>>> with constraints, and switching on the troubleshooting overlay will
>>> show you their origin position. You can then alter the CoM and see the
>>> constraint origin moving, so it can be positioned as required.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Jack
>>>
>>> On 20 August 2012 08:05, Frank Rueter <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> indeed. Though I'm not sure if this is correct behaviour to begin with.
>>>> If
>>>> there is a constraint the CoM shouldn't necessarily change the pivot,
>>>> right?! Just the way energy the object moves and receives/distributes
>>>> energy, right?!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 20/08/12 6:51 PM, Marten Blumen wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That's a good idea.  right now its a total guess until you run the
>>>> simulation.
>>>>
>>>> On 20 August 2012 18:31, Ivan Busquets <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A little late to the party, but just wanted to add my thanks to Jack
>>>>> for
>>>>> sharing this.
>>>>> This is a really awesome addition to J_Ops, and it has a great
>>>>> performance
>>>>> too!
>>>>>
>>>>> As an idea, and seeing how some of the above problems came from the
>>>>> auto-calculated center of mass, maybe you could add a visual
>>>>> representation
>>>>> (like a non-interactive viewer handle) of where the CoM is when it's
>>>>> not
>>>>> overridden by the user?
>>>>> That way it would at least be easier to detect the cases where it's
>>>>> off.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Ivan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 3:44 PM, Frank Rueter <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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 [email protected], 
> http://forums.thefoundry.co.uk/http://support.thefoundry.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nuke-users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nuke-users mailing [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