Inside Sabertooth
Learn how Sabertooth uses 3ds Max to create 3D interactive projects, including HBO Go’s Game of Thrones interactive experience
  • 1/3
You are here: Forum Home / Autodesk® MotionBuilder® / Autodesk MotionBuilder 2009 / Creating an offset through relations without Manip bug
  RSS 2.0 ATOM  

Creating an offset through relations without Manip bug
Rate this thread
 
32261
 
Permlink of this thread  
avatar
  • forestg
  • Posted: 20 July 2009 05:26 AM
  • Total Posts: 86
  • Joined: 30 January 2009 04:54 PM

Hi, i don’t know if someone can give me a pointer on this:

i’m doing a relation constraint using the scale and offset node.

i want to affect the cube 1 object with the cube object, but maintain possibility to manipulate the cube 1.

it sort of works right now, but when i try to manipulate the cube1 it will jump/jerk and i have to place it back and tweak it.

i’ve put an image. i can send the file if it helps.

If by any chance, Brad, you fall on this one, i’ve tried to look through your character animtor toolkit for this but couldn’t find an answer.

thank you all for taking some of your time to read/answer this.

GF



Attachment Attachment
Replies: 1
/userdata/avatar/avatar_282997.jpg

Eureka:

if you create a duplicate of the cube1 object and put it into a mutliref constraint, you can toggle on and off the influence and not have the jerk/jump bug.

sorry for the trouble, hope it can be useful to someone anyway.

GF

Author: forestg

Replied: 20 July 2009 06:08 AM  
avatar

could you post a video cast of what it was doing before and after, I am just curious what you were trying to do with this setup?

Glad you got it working but having this mixed with the multi ref seems like it could be a bit messy to use.



Brad Clark
Co-Founder: Rigging Dojo-Teaching the art and science of character rigging
Author: Inspired 3D Advanced Rigging
The Character Animator Toolkit for Motionbuilder :available now:

Replies: 0
avatar
  • forestg
  • Posted: 22 July 2009 02:23 AM

Hey Brad!

it’s so nice to have you take a look at my stuff, i’m on the other side of the fence, now! hehe…

ok, the purpose of this setup is to have a facial rig driven by bones(in this instance, the left cube is what would be our original face bone), and to have also a duplicate of the face bone rig(the second cube) that will do an offset;driven by a physical slider(the small bottom rectaqngle)

the reason for this, i don’t want to put my face rig into a character face or else i lose control of the bones and have to animate with predetermined poses or cluster shapes....

the hurdle i am facing now is that when you switch the menu item in the multiref menu of the key controls, it will(undercover)automatically put a key on the baselayer of the child(as you describe accurately in one of your earlier posts), then it switches the active reference.

i wanted to put a custom property on my slider that would replicate this behavior through a relation with a script device, but i’m so much of a newbie in Python that it’s going very slowly; i’m good up to the point where i have to put a key, i’m allright to change the active reference)

if you take off the multiref in the scene, you will see it sortof works but there is some jumping /jerking

so, enough of my yapping alreadym, you can take a look at the video

oh, and thank you so much. by the way: nice job on the character animator toolkit.

GF



Attachment Attachment
Replies: 0
avatar
  • forestg
  • Posted: 22 July 2009 02:29 AM

well, i might as well give the scene. it’s even smaller than the capture.



Attachment Attachment
Replies: 0
avatar

I would get rid of the multi ref and approach it either with a custom attribute on the slider to control offset or maybe scale of the smaller cube in Y , thicker ctrls have bigger offsets… instead of having the bone be its own offset

You could always make a master offset control with custom properties that feeds the offset then reference each offset property on to the “cube slider”

if you go this route then you will not have the offset get moved by mistake (as could happen with the bone feeding its own offset)



Brad Clark
Co-Founder: Rigging Dojo-Teaching the art and science of character rigging
Author: Inspired 3D Advanced Rigging
The Character Animator Toolkit for Motionbuilder :available now:

Replies: 0
avatar
  • koneal
  • Posted: 23 July 2009 03:37 AM

Hey Guillaume,

What about this idea? Use a PC constraint, and change the offset in the PC constraint with your “Cube Slider” In the pictures below, if you select the Red “Control Cube” you can move and animate the grey cube, then if you change the bottom “Slider Cube” you can offset the cube via the offset channel in the PC constraint…

I put the file back up with those changes. Is this what you were shooting for? If not, maybe I need to re-read the post… :D

Hope things are well over there!

Kevin



Kevin O’Neal
Ubisoft
Montreal, Quebec

Attachment Attachment
Attachment Attachment
Replies: 0
avatar
  • koneal
  • Posted: 23 July 2009 03:39 AM

No idea why the file didn’t post at the same time… that’s kind of annoying…

here it is…



Kevin O’Neal
Ubisoft
Montreal, Quebec

Attachment Attachment
Replies: 0
avatar

oh nice..I need to spend a day just dragging nodes in to the relations constraint again and see what shows up.

I looked at the propery list for PC constraint but did not see an offset value (I was thinking to much in maya mode )

Happy to see the offsetvalue is exposed to the relations constraint!



Brad Clark
Co-Founder: Rigging Dojo-Teaching the art and science of character rigging
Author: Inspired 3D Advanced Rigging
The Character Animator Toolkit for Motionbuilder :available now:

Replies: 0
avatar
  • koneal
  • Posted: 23 July 2009 04:09 AM

Anything that has an “A” button next to it will show up in RC constraints… just click the button to allow it to receive keys… and when you drop the node into the RC it will have the channel available…

Cheers!
Kevin



Kevin O’Neal
Ubisoft
Montreal, Quebec

Replies: 0
avatar
  • forestg
  • Posted: 23 July 2009 06:10 AM

Veryyyy nice!

thanks to both of you. I think the PC constraint setup would be the most simple to implement.

I will do some tests with the more complex rig and check if this can work and stay user friendly.

Good Job!

GF



Replies: 0