Yeah I agree... That's something I have in my tool set too. Knowing that the simple object oriented way is working just perfectly with Child Comp, Animation... That's a shame :( But I feel bad when I tell my riggers not to use a native command of Softimage as simple as the MatchTransform. Also I have to deal with very old tools that are not really object oriented...and now I have to update them because this command doesn't work the way it was.
Anyway... thanks for your answers. On 17 December 2012 15:14, Raffaele Fragapane <[email protected]>wrote: > And it won't use a silly temp constraints methodology like the factory one > does (was that ever addressed?), which means it will work as expected with > constraint compensation on if the object is constrained, and won't suffer > from direction constraints taking precedence over pose ones. > > The match commands are probably the very first thing anybody doing any > rigging/set dressing should replace from the factory ones, they are mostly > useless outside the absolute simplest scenarios. > > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:59 AM, César Sáez <[email protected]> wrote: > >> There's an old bug when the rotation parameters have fcurves. >> >> The OM way always works: >> objA.Kinematics.Global.Trasnform = objB.Kinematics.Global.Transform >> >> Cheers! >> >> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 11:38 PM, Jeremie Passerin >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> >>> Yeah that sounds like the bug we have too ! >>> Good I'm not crazy. If someone has repro steps, I'll be happy to report >>> it once more to the Softimage Beta. >>> >>> >>> On 17 December 2012 14:29, Sam Cuttriss <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> ah good good, >>>> ive been getting this a bunch lately in 2012. >>>> matches positions but often neglects rotation. >>>> >>> >>> >> > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! > >
