hi, thanks for the feedback. I know it to fast. I had to put a lot of stuff in less than 3 minutes. About you first question, the setup if just an ik that goes from the "knee" equivalent to the ankle, as a standar biped leg, and the the femur joint is outside the ik. it had an aim to the foot that you can turn on and off. Like an autoclavicle almost that you can turn on and off, or blend the following values, so it follows the foot as you want. This setup is the one that animators where I worked liked. It is simple and they where happy with it. about the second question, the UI intend to show a way to keep adding element. It is true that it looks like a biped rig builder, but as shown in the reel you can build anything.
I am working on the second version now, which is completely different. The fist version shown on the reel works great for creatures, but, I can´t build a Tank rig, or a simple book rig. So what I want is to build a new system to be able to create anything. It will be less user friendly, but much more powerful. This one is cool because it is fast and easy to use. Anyway, thanks for the feedback El martes, 28 de junio de 2016, 21:47:12 (UTC+2), Kyle Burris escribió: > > Jumping in here about the demo reel. > > Overall nice work, it looks like you have your head around cartoony > setups. Two things I noticed. > > 1: slow the reel down. I rewound the video 4 times to try and see if the > rear dog leg keeps the femur and the metatarsals parallel and it was just > to fast to see what the hell was going on. I've always found that rigging > reels that just show someone wiggling every attribute on the rig don't > really convey much. You can speed things up a bit but focus on a few things > you solved in an innovative way. I'd rather see you show 3-5 rig setups > slowly so I understand what problem you solved and how than see everything > on every rig. > > 2: The illustration you use in the rig UI is cute, but ultimately it > doesn't lend its self to adding new setups. What would happen if you had to > add another setup? Would you have to redraw the illustration? How would > that work in production? > > Keep it up though, there are some things in there I'd like to take a > better look at if they weren't flying by me at 100km/h :) > > Kyle > > On Saturday, June 4, 2016 at 4:20:36 PM UTC-4, Rudi Hammad wrote: >> >> hello, >> >> so I spend a couple of months making my show reel which is a rig builder >> tool. Here you have the link if you want to check it >> >> riggin/programing reel <https://vimeo.com/168109200> >> >> I learned a lot doing it, and I want to thank this forum for helping me >> with my questions (even the stupids ones....) >> Any way, now I want to rewrite my code avoiding making some mistakes I >> did previously, so I wanted to ask you If I am using the instance variables >> right.( code in pastebin link ) >> >> http://pastebin.com/yxMNRXHT >> >> I thought that arguments like side, or name are very used in all the >> methods, so is it okey to out them in the __init__? this way, I don´t have >> to keep using those arguments over >> and over again in the rest of the methods. >> But of course that obligates me to create the class instance. >> >> I now about classmethods to call directly the class. But then, should all >> my methods be classmethods? >> I don´t know, a programer told me that scripting for 3d I don´t have to >> care too much about all that, but I don´t want my code just to work, I want >> to make a proper code too when >> I am applying it to rigging. >> >> cheers >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Python Programming for Autodesk Maya" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/python_inside_maya/ca5cb9cc-2dfb-427f-868a-cd702e3e905c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
