|
|
How to weightpaint vertices inside the mesh?
About Truespace Archives
These pages are a copy of the official truespace forums prior to their removal somewhere around 2011.
They are retained here for archive purposes only.
How to weightpaint vertices inside the mesh? // Archive: Tech Forum
Post by frootee // May 29, 2008, 4:18am
|
frootee
Total Posts: 2667
|
Thanks for the bug reports Tiles.
Yeah, obviously 7.51 is not being developed anymore so nothing we can do about that really. 7.6 is still underway of course, and with that, we can have a positive impact on the end result.
transient, do you have any bugs to add to this, regarding weight painting?
Wizard: do you?
Brotherx: do you have any bugs to report on this issue?
Anyone else?
Please post them in the bugs section please.
I'm getting back into animation stuff now so if you have specific issues (prioritized please) can you do me / us a favor and give us a step by step (more or less) procedure on how you get the bug? If it's too lengthy a general description will do. We're all aware already of the initial issue posted here; tomas replied to that already.
thanks.
Froo |
Post by brotherx // May 29, 2008, 4:27am
|
brotherx
Total Posts: 538
|
Actually calling someone a moron far worse. |
Post by W!ZARD // May 29, 2008, 4:28am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
People who never win, and never quit, are idiots. No argument there although I don't see the relevance to our current discussion.
And I think some just don't get it, that not having good software is not an "attitude problem" on the user's behalf - to suggest this is insulting and far more inflammatory than anything Tiles has said. If you think that's what I'm suggesting then you have not read my post correctly - I am not and never was, in this thread, talking about software. I am talking about attitudes that work which is quite different to saying someone has an 'Attitude problem'.
If you are going to paraphrase me - which you are welcome to do - please have the courtesy to respond to what I've written and not to your negative twistings of my words. I find this practice of yours to be insulting and inflammatory. You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to twist my words.
Of course, this is always how these threads end up - the usual suspects resort to personal jibes and things go south.Again I believe you are twisting things unnecessarily - Tiles and I have had passionate discussions before which ended up with a respectful agreement to differ and to move on. I am not a person who resorts to personal jibes - mainly because I consider that resorting to personal jibes is an unnecessary act of cowardice and no fit replacement for a logical and clear discussion.
Finally, saying I have no class is an opinion you are entitled to - you'll need to prove it before it can be considered a fact. Perhaps you would also like to explain how calling me a moron is an example of acting with class? It is certainly not an example of addressing my comments with intelligent discussion and respect. I don't call you names - please extend the same courtesy to me. |
Post by brotherx // May 29, 2008, 4:28am
|
brotherx
Total Posts: 538
|
Nope, no bugs. only minor annoyance is sometimes workspace fails to render if a screen saver kicks in...got a work-around :D |
Post by Steinie // May 29, 2008, 5:17am
|
Steinie
Total Posts: 3667
|
Hey I'm an idiot and I'll help you prove it!:p
Since this thread has gone south, lets get back on track with helping someone with the problem at hand.
I'm glad you guy don't own missiles...:rolleyes: |
Post by W!ZARD // May 29, 2008, 5:50am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
lets get back on track with helping someone with the problem at hand.
That's all I was trying to do Bob.:D |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 29, 2008, 5:55am
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
Jack just does modeling in his video. What i not know is how many crashes he had while making the video. And if the video isn't made with 7.6 at all. I cannot say anything about the stability of the modeling tools because i haven't really touched the modeling tools yet. I still model in 6.6. Maybe the modeling tools are a stable part of 7.51.
I didn't have any crashes while working on the video. Everything was done in 7.51 since some aspects of the 7.6 UI were under NDA and others were unfinished or changing at the time. I'll be waiting until 7.6 is released to begin the next section so that the UI and tool behavior will be consistent in the videos.
Tomas is an awesome programmer and does a great job squashing bugs. Because of that the modeling tools are very stable. :) |
Post by jamesmc // May 29, 2008, 6:03am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
I didn't have any crashes while working on the video. Everything was done in 7.51 since some aspects of the 7.6 UI were under NDA and others were unfinished or changing at the time. I'll be waiting until 7.6 is released to begin the next section so that the UI and tool behavior will be consistent in the videos.
Tomas in an awesome programmer and does a great job squashing bugs. Because of that the modeling tools are very stable. :)
I thought I saw tell-tale signs of photoshopping in that video! Then there was that grassy knoll scene... (wait flashback, 1960s, party, sugar cube...) |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 29, 2008, 6:08am
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
:D No Photoshop here, the GIMP does it for me.... er um... lol. But you can see a few places where I screwed up and cross-fade transitioned to a re-take... :p |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 7:12am
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
Wizard, you seem to manage the no default pose bug. Again, how do you workaround this bug? How do you manage to have a working default pose that doesn`t destroy your pose when you click the reset pose button?
Because that's the main reason why i cannot finish my rig. Every time i hit the reset pose my pose sets to something deformed. Tomas told me that this issue may be fixed in 7.6, but he named no workaround.
It is really the main reason why i have stopped here. Remodeling my mesh to apply weightpaint seemed too much effort for me with the knowledge in the neck that this rig is useless anyways because of the reset pose bug.
See, it has nothing to do with the winner looser situation here. It never has anyways. It's a bug that stops me. Have a look in this thread. Watch the picture with the top view.
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=5513
Tomas is an awesome programmer and does a great job squashing bugs. Because of that the modeling tools are very stable.
I never doubted that the programmers do a great job. Thanks for that :)
And good to know that the modeling tools are really that stable. On the other hand, i haven't touched them yet ... :p
Yeah, obviously 7.51 is not being developed anymore so nothing we can do about that really.
That's where the main problem is. The software gets released half finished and gets bug fixed half finished. That way a programmer can as good as it can be and you still miss a stable release.
Hmm, no reason to defeat my methods. They work, which makes them good enough. Just telling my reasons here.
Reasons why i still use 6.6 for modeling is that i don't have to dive into a spaghetti station for basic operations here. The navigation in Workspace is still ways too harsh with the native move rotate scale buttons. I would have to use the navigation widget, which i dislike. The workspace also misses a working objects coordinate system to rotate around a certain point, which is essential. It is broken and i have reported it. It still rotates around the world axis instead the object axis. And the Modeler has a few new bugs and quirks that i strongly dislike. 6.6 is much faster. It is still the better trueSpace for me.
Plus i am used to 66 and it still does the modeling job. I have no problem to pay the price of saving often then ;)
I was also this busy with reporting bugs that i simply found no time to learn the new modeling tools. I simply haven't arrived at them yet. That's the main reason.
I hope that one changes with 7.6. Both, that there are less bugs, and that i find the time to inspect the new modeling tools. |
Post by frootee // May 29, 2008, 7:22am
|
frootee
Total Posts: 2667
|
I was not defeating your methods Tiles.
Thank you for pointing out the bugs.
As I understand it, this is the problem you are running into. Please confirm:
1) you have the default pose set such that the elbow is bent in the manner you have shown in your link.
2) you repose your character
3) you choose to reset the pose to the default pose
4) rather than the default pose (with the elbow bent), you get a different default pose
Is this correct Tiles? |
Post by trueBlue // May 29, 2008, 7:47am
|
trueBlue
Total Posts: 1761
|
The workspace also misses a working objects coordinate system to rotate around a certain point, which is essential. It is broken and i have reported it. It still rotates around the world axis instead the object axis.
In Workspace select your object or object's elements (PE) and use the Middle Mouse Button click + drag. Also to center selected to view use the Middle Mouse Button double click. If your Axis is offset it will rotate around that instead. |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 7:53am
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
1) you have the default pose set such that the elbow is bent in the manner you have shown in your link.
2) you repose your character
3) you choose to reset the pose to the default pose
4) rather than the default pose (with the elbow bent), you get a different default pose
Is this correct Tiles?
Not really. This link is somehow misleading. It was just that at this point it happened again. So i thought i report this issue too. And i have linked this shot to proove that the default pose isn't resetting to its saved state.
It happens with no matter what i try. I build my skeleton, set a default pose, add an IK handler, pull it, click at reset pose and get back a pose as shown in the shot. A deformed one. And not the one i have saved. Which is useless, unfortunately. |
Post by frootee // May 29, 2008, 7:56am
|
frootee
Total Posts: 2667
|
I re-read your post there Tiles. Now I understand better what you were saying.
Can you post a screenshot showing the deformed hand? In the pics and video the hands seemed to look ok. |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 7:58am
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
In Workspace select your object or object's elements (PE) and use the Middle Mouse Button click + drag. Also to center selected to view use the Middle Mouse Button double click. If your Axis is offset it will rotate around that instead.
Thanks trueBlue :) |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 8:12am
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
First picture, Default Pose is set. Everything is symmetrical.
Second picture, i pulled the handler.
Third picture, i click the reset pose button. It doesn't reset.
It's not always so obvious like here. Sometimes it is just a very small amount missing. But it is visible. |
Post by W!ZARD // May 29, 2008, 8:20am
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Tiles I really wish I could help you. Perhaps the reset pose function works better for me because I tend to use skeletons derived from .bvh files rather than building my own.
Here's my usual workflow:
Load model into tS, load a BVH skeleton and position them. The default pose of the skeleton has never conformed to the shape of the character so I repose the skeleton to conform to the native position of my character - usually spreading the legs a tad and adjusting the spine.
Then I use the set default pose tool on the skeleton only. Next, (and I've found this is important though I don't know why and it may be related to your bug) I totally deselect the skeleton. Then I test it by dragging it around a bit and clicking the reset to default pose tool and the skeleton returns to the pose I have set as the default.
Then I start attaching things - at present I don't animate the mouth movements so I tend to first attach the eyes to the head bone plus things like glasses and hats. I also attach the head mesh itself to the head bone using the attach object to bone tool rather than the attach skin to skeleton. This is not an ideal solution and I'm just hoping the new morphs will allow me to continue to use this method but it does simplify things very much.
Next I add any other accessories, guns, swords brooms flying carpets etc to the appropriate bone and last of all I attach the body skin to the skeleton.
The I drag it around a bit and test the default pose tool - this returns everything to my base pose and then I move on to assigning vertex weights.
Next step is to assign a .BVH derived animation clip to the skeleton and run the anim to check the vertex assignments. Any stray vertices will appear during the anim run. I can adjust the vertex weights at any time and if all gets out of control I can return to the default pose at any stage and start again.
I've had great success with using .bvh derived anim clips (mostly from Mr Bones) and using additive tracks to adjust and modify as required.
This approach works for the way I do things - I don't know if it's suitable for what you are wanting to do but I do hope this information contributes to helping you find a solution.
Good luck! |
Post by tomasb // May 29, 2008, 8:54am
|
tomasb
Total Posts: 261
|
First picture, Default Pose is set. Everything is symmetrical.
Second picture, i pulled the handler.
Third picture, i click the reset pose button. It doesn't reset.
It's not always so obvious like here. Sometimes it is just a very small amount missing. But it is visible.
Are you sure you do not have joint selected? (if you select joint before reset, only limb gets reset). If this is not the case, i'd like to have that mesh for inspection after you set default pose. |
Post by frootee // May 29, 2008, 9:37am
|
frootee
Total Posts: 2667
|
Here is link to Tiles' mesh tomas. It's a Garden Gnome I think. :)
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=5513 |
Post by Igor K Handel // May 29, 2008, 10:11am
|
Igor K Handel
Total Posts: 411
|
Too many posts to respond to in detail.
Couple of points I will come back with though
The minute someone knowledgeable suggests a workaround it says to me
This is now a known problem and (whatever the function is) has been recognised as not working in normal use as the majority of users would expect. My question is why was it not picked up in beta testing? Not enough time, not enough money, people, considered low priority etc. Is the balance correct?
2. Exasperation at imperfect tools a) does not mean I am a quitter b) does not mean I am blaming tools to cover my lack of skills. It simply means my tolerance to having to find out about workarounds is perhaps lower than others.
3. A well made product (not even perfect) should be able to stand public scrutiny. If Caligari or other forum contributors squirm becasue I as a new user express exasperation at tools that require in some cases (at a minimum) a workaround, then sorry it is not me who should apologise for anything! Theres a pun there somewhere?
4. To say nothing will achieve about the same. I have openly stated my view from a perspective as a new TS purchaser which should be read at face value.. this is how I have found the software, please please sort it substantually.(only spelt right) The fact that I have bothered to go to the effort of writing should make it evident that I want to continue to be a customer/user (so by implication must find something good in the program)but that I have issues that need to be resolved in order for that to happen. If I was a quitter I wouldn't waste my time writing all this, I'd just have become an ex customer!
5. Is a potential new purchaser not entitled to know both the good and the "bad", in order to make an educated and informed purchase? should it be brushed under the carpet, should they be allowed to feel the same as I have? Should I not have said anything? Shut up and go away would that remove the problem? I believe not. No-one said anything when I pointed out how helpful everyone is on the forums, no-one complained when I said that one of the reasons I purchased TS was the involvement of the CEO in the forum. But I mention a tool problem and suddenly I put off customers and jeopardise future upgrades? I believe my input is rational, factual, and ultimately as a paid up customer fair. Papering over problems solves nothing and potentially puts future customers right where I am now!
On a lighter note..
a440
ok ok bad joke
WIZ your example (of biblical proportions LOL) is fair enough but I do believe even as a noob digger that the handle on my shovel is loose, and one of the arms/handle is missing, this makes learning more difficult as I have to contend with an inbuilt sporadic cutting to the left or right. In addition now that I have run out of unbroken ankles I struggle :)
In the enclosed manual.... "an a-z of amazing digging using the deluxe holemaster 3000" Affectionately known as "Down and dirty holemaster 3000 (film rights reserved)), it says.....
"for a straight cut press firmly with right boot whilst compensating with pressure to the left with both hands..
Well I follow the instructions but the wobble sends it off either to the right or left"
As a result my square hole now resembles a grenade crater rather than the expected grenademaster.. I mean holemaster 3000 perfect square. After much practice my garden now replicates a lunar landscape and my enjoyment of gardening has dwindled to the point where I have priced up for astroturf. Some of the guys on the holemaster 3000 website reckon I am a quitter, others that I blame my tools. I better not talk about it in the forums though because it might be seen as negative to speak openly of my experience as a new user..
As a pianist, teacher and technician I can only tell you that playing a dodgy instrument makes improving more difficult and that battling against gremlins in the instrument can be a major source of disheartenment and potentially destroys a large part of the pleasure in learning and so improving, and (sharp intake of breath) sticking at the learning and not quitting.
Hmm something to compare... Ok a slightly sluggish sticking key on a piano. The key is there "the tool is complete", it looks as it should, it sorta mostly plays if you don't try to repeat the note too quick. There is a workaround, dont play the same key with fast repeats using adjacent fingers, use only one finger from both hands alternatively. Should the customer tell me as their dealer... absolutely. Should the instrument be allowed into the public domain without this having been checked beforehand... absolutely no! Should my business learn from this quality control issue and apply it to other areas where control is needed.... You bet ya.
Come to think of it perhaps thats why I sold so many instruments. Because I carefully chose a lowest level of quality in an instrument below which I would not deal. This ensured I had customers who's learning was the challenge never the purchased instrument. (LOL I just reread this and I leave myself wide open for your reasoned arguement)
Sure some/many upgraded later but they all came back to me for that upgraded instrument. Repeat customers and good word of mouth were critical to our success and long term expansion. The world isn't perfect and when we did create the odd problem.. the priority was fast resolution with complete and utter transparency to the customer (a patch if you will). Once that was sorted then we looked at longterm removal of potential repeat issues, both for that specific problem but also more importantly related to way we did our quality control in general. In addition we also sent out questionaires every year in which we specifically requested blunt feedback on our customer care, our response time, our resolution of issues etc. To ensure that we and our staff were both seen and were actively improving not only our quality but our quality controls, we sent all of our customers the full stats of responses, so year on year they and we could see that we were serious about controlled quality. I never lost a single customer even though they had the stats of problems highlighted and delivered to them on a plater. Even our competition saw the stats, but they simply didn't grasp the attitude that drove us, so we gained and they gradually fell behind. ok so someone will say ... but software isn't the same as a piano.. look again... this is a balancing act between quality cost revenue customer care / base etc etc I look at the number of active users on the forum, hmm the balance somewhere is not good. Something needs to change? Heck I PAID good money to be given customer perceptions, opinions etc on my business. this forum does it for Caligari free!! This forum is way better than a questionaire, once all the waffle is cut out. (mind you beween me and Wiz thats a full time editing job for someone)
Ok enough of this in the Tech section, I shut up now and await developments.
Just about everyone here has, at some point, said something I completely agree with.... so how come I am the only one thats right ALL the time lol?
Yours
IK |
Post by jamesmc // May 29, 2008, 10:53am
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
Just a newbie question here, but I always thought that anything to do with skinning and bone, that triangulated meshes were a bad thing.
Not a gamer modeler, but I always thought triangulation would mess polygonal tools up if you used them? |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 29, 2008, 2:06pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
It's really mainly an issue when doing SDS stuff and it's harder to visualize edgeflows with triangles as opposed to quads where you have clear rows and columns.
In the end it all has to be converted to triangles to be rendered and workspace models are really made up of triangle strips anyway, so the advantage of working with triangles directly is that you don't have to worry about where trueSpace is going to put the triangles you can just do it yourself. Also some game engines only support triangle meshes. |
Post by jamesmc // May 29, 2008, 2:44pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
It's really mainly an issue when doing SDS stuff and it's harder to visualize edgeflows with triangles as opposed to quads where you have clear rows and columns.
In the end it all has to be converted to triangles to be rendered and workspace models are really made up of triangle strips anyway, so the advantage of working with triangles directly is that you don't have to worry about where trueSpace is going to put the triangles you can just do it yourself. Also some game engines only support triangle meshes.
Ya, but wondering if when weight painting that the location of quads versus triangles, that quads are better if they are localized for the mesh (i.e. around joints) See my crude finger drawing below. :D |
Post by Jack Edwards // May 29, 2008, 4:17pm
|
Jack Edwards
Total Posts: 4062
|
Nice visualization James! The important thing as your illustration correctly points out, is that whether you use triangles or quads the geometry still need to be positioned to allow for the animation. Basically the triangle version of the finger should be the same as the top one, but with an edge splitting each of the quads into triangles.
TrueSpace already does this internally on Workspace side. The "Split polygons" tool, is really a triangulate tool. If you use it on your mesh or faces of your mesh, it will set the edge flags for the hidden triangle edges, revealing the triangles.
This is a good way to figure out what to do to fix geometry that isn't behaving as expected. If the edges aren't going the way you want, then delete those faces and rebuild them with the triangles going the way you want, then select the triangles and use the Merge Polygons tool to set the edge flags back and make it one polygon again. |
Post by jamesmc // May 29, 2008, 4:50pm
|
jamesmc
Total Posts: 2566
|
thanks for the explanation.
Was playing around with a spere and cylinder model, boned and skinned it and got this error. It's a dmp file, so don't know what it is, so zipped it and uploaded it.
It happened when I stretched the head of the bot too far out and it stretched the neck.
Exploring further into mangled meshes and bones. :D |
Post by tomasb // May 29, 2008, 8:02pm
|
tomasb
Total Posts: 261
|
Here is link to Tiles' mesh tomas. It's a Garden Gnome I think. :)
http://forums1.caligari.com/truespace/showthread.php?t=5513
this one does not have the ik handles defined yet. |
Post by W!ZARD // May 29, 2008, 8:22pm
|
W!ZARD
Total Posts: 2603
|
Originally posted by IKHandel
This is now a known problem and (whatever the function is) has been recognised as not working in normal use as the majority of users would expect. My question is why was it not picked up in beta testing? Not enough time, not enough money, people, considered low priority etc. Is the balance correct?
That sort of depends on your definition of balance - some think the balance is correct when their end of the seesaw is high and dry while the other end is in the puddle!! Assuming a truly equal balance however your point is certainly valid.
I believe that some known issues were not picked up in beta testing because Caligari was under financial and commercial pressure from a demanding customer base to fix bugs in the old code. To answer that problem they needed to rewrite the application from the ground up - a massive task for a small company. I suspect they were caught between the proverbial rock and a hard place and were probably compelled to release tS 7 somewhat prematurely. Many of those glitches which appeared in the first tS 7 release were patched with an upgrade and then a new point release (7.1) followed eventually by another (7.5)
2. Exasperation at imperfect tools a) does not mean I am a quitter b) does not mean I am blaming tools to cover my lack of skills. It simply means my tolerance to having to find out about workarounds is perhaps lower than others.It was never my intention to suggest anyone was a quitter - apologies if that was what I communicated.
3. A well made product (not even perfect) should be able to stand public scrutiny. If Caligari or other forum contributors squirm becasue I as a new user express exasperation at tools that require in some cases (at a minimum) a workaround, then sorry it is not me who should apologise for anything! Theres a pun there somewhere?LOL - I think everyone has experienced exasperation (it's inherent to learning any complex task) and I believe that everyone is entitled to express that - what I object to is is negative assessment based on unrealistic expectations and inflated claims of any sort - saying trueSpace works perfectly is just as misleading as saying it's completely useless.
4. To say nothing will achieve about the same. I have openly stated my view from a perspective as a new TS purchaser which should be read at face value.. this is how I have found the software, please please sort it substantually.(only spelt right) The fact that I have bothered to go to the effort of writing should make it evident that I want to continue to be a customer/user (so by implication must find something good in the program)but that I have issues that need to be resolved in order for that to happen. If I was a quitter I wouldn't waste my time writing all this, I'd just have become an ex customer!
5. Is a potential new purchaser not entitled to know both the good and the "bad", in order to make an educated and informed purchase? should it be brushed under the carpet, should they be allowed to feel the same as I have? Should I not have said anything? Shut up and go away would that remove the problem? I believe not. No-one said anything when I pointed out how helpful everyone is on the forums, no-one complained when I said that one of the reasons I purchased TS was the involvement of the CEO in the forum. But I mention a tool problem and suddenly I put off customers and jeopardise future upgrades? I believe my input is rational, factual, and ultimately as a paid up customer fair. Papering over problems solves nothing and potentially puts future customers right where I am now! Well said and prefectly valid - I've never taken any offence at anything you've written here Igor - your points are always balanced and supported with reason. Sadly, not everyone who comments here has your tact and diplomacy.
On a lighter note..
a440
ok ok bad joke You could say it fell a little flat - a435 ;)
WIZ your example (of biblical proportions LOL) is fair enough but I do believe even as a noob digger that the handle on my shovel is loose, and one of the arms/handle is missing, this makes learning more difficult as I have to contend with an inbuilt sporadic cutting to the left or right. In addition now that I have run out of unbroken ankles I struggle Yeah I know - this is where my argument falls over of course. However I can just imagine my bosses reaction if I said to him I couldn't dig the hole because my shovel handle was loose!
If a simple work around - perhaps putting in an extra screw or a wedge - stops the handle from being loose then I'll happily use it to complete the job - which does not mean it's OK for a company to sell new loose handled shovels!
(TRIM out funny extended discourse). I better not talk about it in the forums though because it might be seen as negative to speak openly of my experience as a new user..I don't think anyone objects to objective discussion of pros and cons - I certainly don't. It's misleading and exaggerated rhetoric (good and bad) that may misinform potential newcomers unfairly that I take issue with.
As a pianist, teacher and technician I can only tell you that playing a dodgy instrument makes improving more difficult and that battling against gremlins in the instrument can be a major source of disheartenment and potentially destroys a large part of the pleasure in learning and so improving, and (sharp intake of breath) sticking at the learning and not quitting.
Hmm something to compare... Ok a slightly sluggish sticking key on a piano. The key is there "the tool is complete", it looks as it should, it sorta mostly plays if you don't try to repeat the note too quick. There is a workaround, dont play the same key with fast repeats using adjacent fingers, use only one finger from both hands alternatively. Should the customer tell me as their dealer... absolutely. Should the instrument be allowed into the public domain without this having been checked beforehand... absolutely no! Should my business learn from this quality control issue and apply it to other areas where control is needed.... You bet ya.
Come to think of it perhaps thats why I sold so many instruments. Because I carefully chose a lowest level of quality in an instrument below which I would not deal. This ensured I had customers who's learning was the challenge never the purchased instrument. (LOL I just reread this and I leave myself wide open for your reasoned arguement) LOL - er, I think you just made my argument for me!!
Actually I suspected you might bring up the sticky key argument - and it is admittedly a major flaw in my point - but again, if a simple dab of oil allows you to play then you are empowered to get the job completed despite inherent faulty construction. To me it makes sense to apply the dab of oil and complete the task while also informing the piano maker of the sticky key. This is both proactive and reasonable. Refusing to recommend an otherwise well made instrument is unbalanced and unfair. Saying that none of the keys work because one key is sticky is unbalanced and unfair. Sadly there are folk here who are saying essentially that!
(Another TRIM for those with shorter attention spans) ok so someone will say ... but software isn't the same as a piano.. look again... this is a balancing act between quality cost revenue customer care / base etc etc I couldn't agree more - sadly some excessively negative nay-sayers over look this point in their zeal to right wrongs by simply complaining loudly enough despite the collateral damage that this questionable strategy probably generates in lost sales as pointed out (with considerably less verbosity) by BrotherX
I look at the number of active users on the forum, hmm the balance somewhere is not good. Something needs to change? Heck I PAID good money to be given customer perceptions, opinions etc on my business. this forum does it for Caligari free!! This forum is way better than a questionaire, once all the waffle is cut out. (mind you beween me and Wiz thats a full time editing job for someone)
Ok enough of this in the Tech section, I shut up now and await developments.
Just about everyone here has, at some point, said something I completely agree with.... so how come I am the only one thats right ALL the time lol?Chuckle! You'll have to share that secret with me as it appears I'm wrong quite often:D The world is divided into those who think they are right!
Yours
IK
Huge thanks and much respectful appreciation for your beautifully constructed, balanced and well considered response. You appear to be a true gentleman and a most excellent correspondent so thanks for that.
ATB
WZRD |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 8:56pm
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
How many subthreads are running now? Unastisfied Users, Bugs and Quirks, Crashreports, Modeling Issues ... :p
Jamesmc, my mesh is modeled in Quads and N-Gons. With the needed edgeloops for the animation.
http://reinerstileset.4players.de/ext/head3.jpg
http://reinerstileset.4players.de/ext/head6.jpg
Modeling is finished, Mesh unioned, and my last step was to triangulate it for game engine needs then. Game engines usually don't like quads and n-gons. Has to do with a tri is the most stable unit. You can bend a quad, but you cannot bend a tri. The for the animation important edgeloops are still there and working. It's just that i divided the faces here down to Tris :)
Okay, back to my mainproblem :)
It is morning, and now i understand the issue about selecting the joints tool, then click at reset pose. Case one. One can easily stumble across this. I would prefer to have the reset pose button to reset the pose in any case. But okay. Now that i know of it ... :)
Tomas, i was indeed trapped by the joint tool selected before here in this shot. And meanwise this is the first scene where the default pose seems to work now. I have opened this scene, hit the reset pose button, and it sets back as it shoud, without deformings. Hmm.
Now let's go figure what i did different this time. Gimme a few moments to find a scene with not working default pose. Maybe i can even record a movie to show what i mean ... |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 9:13pm
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
Before i forget, thanks Wizard for your detailled description. Is of help. It may have to do that i shape my skeleton from scratch that you don't stumble across the bug. I never used BVH before.
Tomas, this scene still shows the reset default pose problem. I have shaped the skeleton, skinned it, hit the set default pose button, and started with joints setup then.
Select the character, hit reset pose, and you will see that the left hand goes more back than the right hand. That is not the pose i have stored.
And no matter how i go on here, i will never have a working default pose from now on. This is case two.
As a sideeffect, loading my old scene produced a crash report :) |
Post by Tiles // May 29, 2008, 9:33pm
|
Tiles
Total Posts: 1037
|
This is so mean. I test to reproduce the bug, have it, turn on record and the bug doesn't happen :p
Okay, from what i can say it has to do with touching the joints and bones directly with the dynamic pose tool. But i cannot catch it. And so i cannot be sure :o
As a side effect, now that i have a working default pose, back to finish this rig. :) |
|
