If you ever decide to start showing the DAG side of the graph in the NE, please make sure it's a toggle like in the HG (and possibly a better and more extensive one :) ) and not a mandatory addition to the graphing. Shapes being an exception as they are unique the only one-to-many DAG item due to instancing. I actually abuse the NE as an authoring platform for rigging a lot, and would rather see work done for it to become cleaner and more uniformly responsive in a number of situations for that, not see it more cluttered, or fall by the side in favor of bifrost getting all the love.
Bifrost has a shot at being an ICE replacement, but ICE and authoring of that kind works well within boundaries, the NE does a better job of working across the whole scene and operating the two are completely different things with different problems to solve and factor making them intuitive. The HS, and the "connection" view in the HG, however, need to die already and see all the love transferred to the NE :p On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Luc-Eric Rousseau <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we should draw a line to show the parenting in the Maya Node > Editor, that would make transform vs object make more sense, something > we're not doing. > > For loops... actually Maya and XSI have similar in architecture, and > XSI's scene graph is full of loops as well. Every operator, like the > moveop, is an operator that reads and writes back to the same object, > so it's a loop. I recall the kinestate to be particularly hairy. > We've kept all that kitchen stuff hidden under the hood in XSI. It's > just not showable: a trivial operator like the moveop has half a > dozen connections, a hidden cluster, and it just gets more complicated > from there. The maya dg is a lot more simple, but it still isn't > designed be directly used, and the hypergraph/node editor are more > debugging tools than authoring tools. Bifrost will be designed for > authoring. > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 11:06 PM, Gerbrand Nel <[email protected]> wrote: > > I think my main problem with the node editor is that some things that are > > influencing each other, aren't connected in the node editor. Other things > > are connected in a loop. > > This makes no sense to us humans. > > I was hoping the node editor would fill the gap left by the lack of a > proper > > operator stack, but it still blows my mind how destructive Maya's work > flow > > is. > > For now the node editor is where I do my shading, and check to see if my > > deformers are still linked when things don't seem to work right. > > > > OH here is a fun thing to try: put some animation on a sphere. Then graph > > that in the editor, and add animation layers. My nose almost started > > bleeding :) > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
