Just to add to what Eric clarified (and rightly so):
To the scene graph, the bones are nothing but a bunch of point (nulls)
with parent--child relationship. In theory, you could completely rig a
character with out any bones using just a bunch of nulls if you do not
want IK. But no character setup is complete without IK and hence the
need of bones. In case of just nulls, the distance b/w them would
represent the bone length. The bone implicits are just there to give you
a feel of the actual bone plus many features of IK that you cannot have
without an IK solver working for you.
Also in character rigging (from whatever little experience I have in
that field), it is of utmost importance to have the envelope deformers
on a completely different layer from the rest of the rig. In fact it is
advisable to have your rig layered out according to functionality of its
elements. So one layer just for deformers, another one just for bones, a
separate one for secondary controllers and so on and so forth. As an
essential rigging practice, you should be able plot the animation the of
the deformers (nulls) and be delete the complete rig without losing
animation.
ALOK
GANDHI
/ chef directeur technique - lead technical director
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
T:
*450 430-0010 x225
F:
*450 430-0009
www.modusfx.com <http://www.modusfx.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODUS
FX
120 Rue Turgeon,
Sainte-Therese (Quebec) CANADA J7E 3J1
Follow us on
Facebook <http://www.facebook.com/ModusFX>
&
Twitter <https://twitter.com/Modusfx>
**
On 08/03/2013 4:02 PM, Eric Thivierge wrote:
Not sure what you mean Gustavo. We still use Bone chains for solving
the IK and we take our deformer nulls and constrain them to the bones.
Then when switching to FK, blend the constraints over to the FK
controls (curve objects).
The squash and stretch is done through your control setup. Your
deformers just react to what that setup does. You don't envelope to
Bones in a bone chain. The squash and stretch you get from doing this
is fake btw. Under the hood it is actually adding your roots and
effectors to the envelope and uses the bone + next bone or effector to
do the weighting. Instead you have to compensate by having a null
deformer at both ends of the bone when using a setup without them.
The bone implicits do not offer a solution as they do not have roots
or effectors and thus when used in skinning, reacts just as a null does.
--------------------------------------------
Eric Thivierge
http://www.ethivierge.com
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 3:15 PM, Gustavo Eggert Boehs
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
How do you get objects to point the right place when building
hierarchies from, say, nulls. Plus how do you store the original
distance between them in case you want to squash, stretch? I mean
it is doable, but seems like a good amount of work for something
basic.
Doesnt the recently introduced IKless bones present a simpler
solution. Or do even them present such an overhead?
Last time Ive checked though they would brake weightmap symettry.
Quite a deal braker...
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
Version: 2012.0.2238 / Virus Database: 2641/5646 - Release Date: 03/03/13
