I didn't read every posts so maybe my understanding is wrong but based in last replies from Luc-Eric and Tim Leydecker, it sounds like point cloud scanning is a rigging feature. It is not, so lets return to the subject please :).
That illustrate well that it is much more easy to put money on new techs (like point cloud scanning, web based applications, etc...) than to think about how to improve/re-design an existing workflow like character rigging ! We saw some new systems in modeling (ZBrush etc...) and rendering (Katana) some years ago, but still nothing in the rigging area. It make sense as rigging is really a different culture. You need to be a good character rigger to understand and build a good rigging system. But being a good character rigger means spend a lot of time on existing tools like Maya or XSI. At the end you think only through the proposed tools of your app. If you are a developer interested in designing a rigging system, it is the opposite problem, you can have a fresh new vision but you can miss important concepts of character rigging in your tool. Interesting subject, if you forget about Maya and XSI :) Cheers, Guillaume Laforge On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 4:18 AM, Tim Leydecker <[email protected]> wrote: > Autodesk is doing a lot of development in the area of 3D scan data > handling. > > If you look into what is going on in the area of topology data aquisition > for > architecture, engineering and the military, there is a shift towards 3D > pointcloud > data which imho is compareable to what 2D tracking as a concept brought us > in the 90s. > > (Facial recognition and finally image based modeling and camera positional > data) > > It is at hand that the more complex, raw 3D point cloud data will need new > and abstracted ways > of handling and manipulation, filtering options and adaptive control > layers for approximated data. > > The implication such data for 3D animation brings is that the concept of > wheighting a fixed number > of vertices to a bone may have to be extended beyond a fixed number of > polygons. > > Unfortunately, taking fall-off based volume wheighting as in it´s current > level of finesse > may give worse results than before, especially if your shape options for > the influence volume > are limited to capsules, boxes or spheres. > > I am a bit worried that the process of rigging&wheighting an organic > character will become even > more frustrating and stiff or at least will need even more steps, like > creating an extra controlsurface > with a fixed number of points and wrapping it around the high-density data. > > Such a wrap-deformer takes away control. It´s always the rims and little > caveats that need extra care. > > Cheers, > > tim > > > > > > > > > > On 09.01.2014 02:13, Guillaume Laforge wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 7:55 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau > <[email protected]<mailto: >> [email protected]>> wrote: >> >> In the new future ( not talking about autodesk here) I think >> workflows will standards will be Gator-like tools to deal with topo >> changes (point clouds tools as necessary also ptex-based workflows) >> and katana-like proceduralism for render passes-like workflow. >> >> >> I'm still wondering if a company ( not talking about Autodesk here ) will >> do anything new like that for our little world. Money for such large dev >> projects is just not in the >> animation/vfx world anymore. I'm not sarcastic, just realist. So lets >> embrace old techs like Maya or XSI. They won't evolve too much but won't >> disappear before many (many) years. >> >> Btw, Katana is not the futur, it is now :). >> >>
