(this may be a stupid assumption) i didn't exactly follow all the dude was saying, thx matt for the clarification, his examples where very abstract... would being able to disassociate parent hierarchy have any effect on gimble lock ? making it easier to evade ?
On 13 April 2013 17:23, Marco Peixoto <[email protected]> wrote: > At first I thought that it was a simple Pose based Deformation like > Secondary Shape Modeling, but its not. He says that Modo has now a very > similar Weighting System that Pixar uses (he doesnt say that on the video > but he did on the forums) and that video was to show what Hippodrome (ex > Pixar character Modeler) will be teaching on its coming iBook "Art of > Moving Points": > > http://hippydrome.com/iBookExmpls.html > > > > > > > On 13-04-2013 16:06, Christopher wrote: > > I watched the video, interesting stuff, I'd like to see a comparison > between what was shown in the video and Softimage, specifically what I > liked in the Modo video was the sliding skin effect. > > Christopher > > Matt Lind <[email protected]> > Friday, April 12, 2013 11:19 PM > Basically the guy took 24 minutes to explain a 2 minute concept. > > The main point is Modo can define the order in which deformers are > evaluated to solve envelope weights, and envelope weights are assigned > using 'weight containers' which are logical assignments of points to > deformers. A different kind of weight map. > > The example shows an arm enveloped over 2 bones (3 joints). In Softimage > you'd normally place the bones into a hierarchy and assign the weights to > the joints. as you rotate the shoulder, the elbow and wrist would tag > along for the ride via inheritance of the shoulder's transformation. If > you rotate the elbow, the shoulder is unaffected, but the wrist moves > because it inherit's the elbow's transformation. The point being the > deformer has to reside in the location of the envelope deformation, and > this can be inconvenient for thinking/viewing certain problems such as > wanting to only rotate a deformer by a few degrees. in the case of the > elbow, it may already be rotated to some arbitrary angle making > adding/subtracting a few degrees difficult to visualize. > > In Modo, the weights were assigned to the individual bones via 'weight > containers' (their version of a weight map), but the bones were not placed > into a hiearchy. they were scattered about wherever was convenient. This > allowed the artist to work with the deformations in the local space of the > deformer so if he wanted to say, limit envelope deformations to rotations > of 10 degrees or less, the artist could easily see a 10 degree rotation and > work with the deformer weights. think of it as compensation mode for > vertices of an envelope. You apply the envelope to the defomers, but you > can then offset the vertices where you want and maintain that relationship > as metadata in the weight container. This allows the envelope to deform as > desired, but not require the bones to be moving around with the envelope. > Personally I don't find that useful in the general case, but maybe in a few > rare niche cases it might have some benefit. The part I take issue with is > not having bones in their usual places will make it difficult for animators > to judge how the character is moving when adjusting keys. After all, you > don't generally envelope a rig unless it's expected to be animated, so why > disassociate the bones from the animator's perspective? > > The part of greater interest was pre-evaluation and post-evaluation events > which gives the artist the opportunity to further modify the resulting > deformation as each deformer is evaluated. The example given was not very > good as it could be easily replicated using linked parameters to drive a > lattice or some other easy control, but in more complex cases could be > useful for sculpting the envelope deformation in very specific ways. > > You can replicate most of it in softimage using a different strategy than > is typically used, but some of the more advanced stuff, such as > compensation, would require a custom envelope operator or ICE. > > Matt > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] [ > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Caron [ > [email protected]] > *Sent:* Friday, April 12, 2013 6:53 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: Modo's Deformation (Weight Containers) > > i want to watch it, but the speed is killing me... anyone care to > summarize the feature(s)? > > > > Marco Peixoto <[email protected]> > Friday, April 12, 2013 5:37 PM > This seems really interesting and a new way of dealing with Envelope > Weights: > > > http://vimeo.com/63720234 > > >
<<compose-unknown-contact.jpg>>
