RE: Gear question, again, but new one

[Szabolcs Matefy]

Jer, Miquel,

Here I use Gear very extensively, and this is crazy how easy to rig a unique 
character within a day or so in Gear (OK it's just a game, but anyway).



From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jeremie Passerin
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 5:35 PM
To: softimage
Subject: Re: Gear question, again, but new one

This is great to see that gear is still being used despite the lack of update 
and the minimum support. (Miquel did a great update though)

I'm working on a brand new rigging system here at Blur, much more powerful than 
Gear. We are testing it in production for the first time right now.
Blur has an open source philosophy, so I hope we can make it public by the end 
of the year. I'm sure you guys would love it !

;-)



On 19 February 2014 05:09, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
Nope, but after I sis a succesfull rig in WIP mode, it seems that now the Final 
works too :) Happy rigging!

From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>]
 On Behalf Of Matt Morris
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:41 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage@listproc.autodesk.com>
Subject: Re: Gear question, again, but new one

Sorry, meant 'update guide' option before building.

On 19 February 2014 12:36, Matt Morris 
mailto:matt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of some 
holes recently.

On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
So,

I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist bone 
(rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the character ( a 
lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the rig with legs 
only it's OK.

I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain. Any 
idea?
___
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this 
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is 
required please request a hard-copy version. Crytek GmbH - 
http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322 Frankfurt - HRB77322 
Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.: DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: 
Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli



--
www.matinai.com<http://www.matinai.com>



--
www.matinai.com<http://www.matinai.com>

Re: Gear question, again, but new one

[Mirko Jankovic]

Hey Jeremie,
That will be the day when I'm gonna get soo drunk of joy, drinking for each
character I ever rigged with your GEAR.. and then some for each that will
be rigged with new system :)
Cheer!


On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> This is great to see that gear is still being used despite the lack of
> update and the minimum support. (Miquel did a great update though)
>
> I'm working on a brand new rigging system here at Blur, much more powerful
> than Gear. We are testing it in production for the first time right now.
> Blur has an open source philosophy, so I hope we can make it public by the
> end of the year. I'm sure you guys would love it !
>
> ;-)
>
>
>
>
> On 19 February 2014 05:09, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:
>
>> Nope, but after I sis a succesfull rig in WIP mode, it seems that now the
>> Final works too J Happy rigging!
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
>> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Matt Morris
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:41 PM
>> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
>> *Subject:* Re: Gear question, again, but new one
>>
>>
>>
>> Sorry, meant 'update guide' option before building.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 19 February 2014 12:36, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>
>> Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of
>> some holes recently.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:
>>
>> So,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist
>> bone (rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the
>> character ( a lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the
>> rig with legs only it's OK.
>>
>>
>>
>> I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain.
>> Any idea?
>>
>> ___
>> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
>> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
>> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
>> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
>> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
>> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
>> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
>> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
>> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
>> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>

Re: Gear question, again, but new one

[Jeremie Passerin]

This is great to see that gear is still being used despite the lack of
update and the minimum support. (Miquel did a great update though)

I'm working on a brand new rigging system here at Blur, much more powerful
than Gear. We are testing it in production for the first time right now.
Blur has an open source philosophy, so I hope we can make it public by the
end of the year. I'm sure you guys would love it !

;-)




On 19 February 2014 05:09, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:

> Nope, but after I sis a succesfull rig in WIP mode, it seems that now the
> Final works too J Happy rigging!
>
>
>
> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Matt Morris
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:41 PM
> *To:* softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
> *Subject:* Re: Gear question, again, but new one
>
>
>
> Sorry, meant 'update guide' option before building.
>
>
>
> On 19 February 2014 12:36, Matt Morris  wrote:
>
> Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of
> some holes recently.
>
>
>
> On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:
>
> So,
>
>
>
> I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist
> bone (rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the
> character ( a lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the
> rig with legs only it's OK.
>
>
>
> I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain.
> Any idea?
>
> ___
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>

RE: Gear question, again, but new one

[Szabolcs Matefy]

Nope, but after I sis a succesfull rig in WIP mode, it seems that now the Final 
works too :) Happy rigging!

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Matt Morris
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 1:41 PM
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Gear question, again, but new one

Sorry, meant 'update guide' option before building.

On 19 February 2014 12:36, Matt Morris 
mailto:matt...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of some 
holes recently.

On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
So,

I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist bone 
(rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the character ( a 
lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the rig with legs 
only it's OK.

I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain. Any 
idea?
___
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this 
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is 
required please request a hard-copy version. Crytek GmbH - 
http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322 Frankfurt - HRB77322 
Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.: DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: 
Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli



--
www.matinai.com<http://www.matinai.com>



--
www.matinai.com<http://www.matinai.com>

Re: Gear question, again, but new one

[Matt Morris]

Sorry, meant 'update guide' option before building.


On 19 February 2014 12:36, Matt Morris  wrote:

> Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of
> some holes recently.
>
>
> On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:
>
>> So,
>>
>>
>>
>> I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist
>> bone (rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the
>> character ( a lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the
>> rig with legs only it's OK.
>>
>>
>>
>> I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain.
>> Any idea?
>> ___
>> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
>> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
>> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
>> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
>> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
>> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
>> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
>> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
>> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
>> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
>> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
>> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>



-- 
www.matinai.com

Re: Gear question, again, but new one

[Matt Morris]

Did you try the rebuild rig option in the gear menu? That got me out of
some holes recently.


On 19 February 2014 12:30, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:

> So,
>
>
>
> I am rigging a character. When I make the rig, the right leg's calf twist
> bone (rig.leg_R0_3_shd) is misplaced, it gets under the sole of the
> character ( a lot under the ground floor). Fun fact, that when I create the
> rig with legs only it's OK.
>
>
>
> I tried to duplicate symmetry the guide of the well rigged leg, in vain.
> Any idea?
> ___
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>



-- 
www.matinai.com

RE: GEAR question

[Szabolcs Matefy]

Yep, I'm using it. Experimenting with it a lot, and I have several ideas to 
improve. I'll contact Miquel, when he'll have time :D

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jeremie Passerin
Sent: Thursday, January 23, 2014 7:39 PM
To: softimage
Subject: Re: GEAR question

glad you like it.
You should check the extension that Miquel released
http://www.miqueltd.com/2013/08/gearmc-fork-of-jeremie-passerins-gear.html

On 23 January 2014 01:10, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
OK, then I'll do it myself :)

Loving Gear...

From: 
softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>
 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com<mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com>]
 On Behalf Of Jeremie Passerin
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 6:51 PM
To: softimage
Subject: Re: GEAR question

There is no component doing that right now. Should be fairly easy to script 
though ;-)

On 22 January 2014 03:05, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
Hi folks

A question...

I need to create a sliding bone (like the armpit solution in the Biped Guide in 
Softimage). Is there any Gear specific possibility, or I should simply create 
manually the same?

___
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this 
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is 
required please request a hard-copy version. Crytek GmbH - 
http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322 Frankfurt - HRB77322 
Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.: DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: 
Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

glad you like it.
You should check the extension that Miquel released
http://www.miqueltd.com/2013/08/gearmc-fork-of-jeremie-passerins-gear.html


On 23 January 2014 01:10, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:

> OK, then I’ll do it myself J
>
>
>
> Loving Gear…
>
>
>
> *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:
> softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Jeremie Passerin
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 22, 2014 6:51 PM
> *To:* softimage
> *Subject:* Re: GEAR question
>
>
>
> There is no component doing that right now. Should be fairly easy to
> script though ;-)
>
>
>
> On 22 January 2014 03:05, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:
>
> Hi folks
>
>
>
> A question…
>
>
>
> I need to create a sliding bone (like the armpit solution in the Biped
> Guide in Softimage). Is there any Gear specific possibility, or I should
> simply create manually the same?
>
>
>
> ___
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>
>
>

RE: GEAR question

[Szabolcs Matefy]

OK, then I'll do it myself :)

Loving Gear...

From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
[mailto:softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Jeremie Passerin
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2014 6:51 PM
To: softimage
Subject: Re: GEAR question

There is no component doing that right now. Should be fairly easy to script 
though ;-)

On 22 January 2014 03:05, Szabolcs Matefy 
mailto:szabol...@crytek.com>> wrote:
Hi folks

A question...

I need to create a sliding bone (like the armpit solution in the Biped Guide in 
Softimage). Is there any Gear specific possibility, or I should simply create 
manually the same?

___
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the 
individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not 
disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender 
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete 
this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be 
secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, 
destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore 
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this 
message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is 
required please request a hard-copy version. Crytek GmbH - 
http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322 Frankfurt - HRB77322 
Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.: DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: 
Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

There is no component doing that right now. Should be fairly easy to script
though ;-)


On 22 January 2014 03:05, Szabolcs Matefy  wrote:

> Hi folks
>
>
>
> A question…
>
>
>
> I need to create a sliding bone (like the armpit solution in the Biped
> Guide in Softimage). Is there any Gear specific possibility, or I should
> simply create manually the same?
>
>
> ___
> This message contains confidential information and is intended only for
> the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not
> disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender
> immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
> delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be
> guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted,
> corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
> The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions
> in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail
> transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy
> version. Crytek GmbH - http://www.crytek.com - Grüneburgweg 16-18, 60322
> Frankfurt - HRB77322 Amtsgericht Frankfurt a. Main- UST IdentNr.:
> DE20432461 - Geschaeftsfuehrer: Avni Yerli, Cevat Yerli, Faruk Yerli
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

no sweat, i have worked around it.


On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> Hey Steven,
> I've seen your email... sorry I'm super busy right now.. but I'll try to
> have a look at what you did when I have a minute... hopefully next week.
>
>
> On 24 April 2013 16:39, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> ok so i have made some changes, not exactly as you have suggested cause i
>> wanted to support layout and logic too, but i can't even get a single
>> parameter to be copied up.
>>
>>
>> so i added a new attribute to the component guide class, and i am
>> collecting the gear_PSets added. moving forward if the custom property has
>> 'gear_' in front then its to be copied...
>>
>> >gear\xsi\rig\component\guide.py
>>
>> self.tra[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform
>> self.atra.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform)
>> self.pos[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation
>> self.apos.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation)
>> gearProps = obj.Properties.Filter(c.siCustomParamSet, c.siPropertyFamily,
>> "gear_*")
>> self.cpsets.extend(list(gearProps))
>>
>> then in main component class, i added three new methods
>>
>> def step_01(self):
>> self.getHost()
>> self.addParameters()
>> self.addLayout()
>> self.addLogic()
>> self.addCustomParameters()
>> self.addCustomLayout()
>> self.addCustomLogic()
>> self.setUI()
>> return
>>
>> lets ignore layout and logic at this time and look at adding simple new
>> parameters...
>>
>> def addCustomParameters(self):
>>
>> for cpset in self.guide.cpsets:
>> for param in cpset.Parameters:
>> # skip string type ie. layout and logic params, also skip
>> debug flag
>> if param.ValueType == c.siString or param.Name == "debug":
>> continue
>> self.addAnimParam(param.ScriptName, param.ValueType,\
>> param.Value, param.Min, param.Max, param.SuggestedMin,\
>> param.SuggestedMax)
>>
>> i chose to use addAnimParam thinking it would fall in line better with
>> the GEAR system. also so i can have the setUI() take care of the gui. i
>> tried adding the parameters after the setUI() and used AddParameter2()
>> softimage method directly on the anim_prop but it seems to get overwritten.
>> the build doesn't fail, all my code is being executed (some debug log
>> messages helping me here) and the final result doesn't have my parameters.
>> it looks like it is getting overwritten or discarded in some later
>> process/step.
>>
>> ideas?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> thanks for the tips jeremie, i am going to try this.
>>>
>>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

Hey Steven,
I've seen your email... sorry I'm super busy right now.. but I'll try to
have a look at what you did when I have a minute... hopefully next week.


On 24 April 2013 16:39, Steven Caron  wrote:

> ok so i have made some changes, not exactly as you have suggested cause i
> wanted to support layout and logic too, but i can't even get a single
> parameter to be copied up.
>
>
> so i added a new attribute to the component guide class, and i am
> collecting the gear_PSets added. moving forward if the custom property has
> 'gear_' in front then its to be copied...
>
> >gear\xsi\rig\component\guide.py
>
> self.tra[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform
> self.atra.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform)
> self.pos[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation
> self.apos.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation)
> gearProps = obj.Properties.Filter(c.siCustomParamSet, c.siPropertyFamily,
> "gear_*")
> self.cpsets.extend(list(gearProps))
>
> then in main component class, i added three new methods
>
> def step_01(self):
> self.getHost()
> self.addParameters()
> self.addLayout()
> self.addLogic()
> self.addCustomParameters()
> self.addCustomLayout()
> self.addCustomLogic()
> self.setUI()
> return
>
> lets ignore layout and logic at this time and look at adding simple new
> parameters...
>
> def addCustomParameters(self):
>
> for cpset in self.guide.cpsets:
> for param in cpset.Parameters:
> # skip string type ie. layout and logic params, also skip
> debug flag
> if param.ValueType == c.siString or param.Name == "debug":
> continue
> self.addAnimParam(param.ScriptName, param.ValueType,\
> param.Value, param.Min, param.Max, param.SuggestedMin,\
> param.SuggestedMax)
>
> i chose to use addAnimParam thinking it would fall in line better with the
> GEAR system. also so i can have the setUI() take care of the gui. i tried
> adding the parameters after the setUI() and used AddParameter2() softimage
> method directly on the anim_prop but it seems to get overwritten. the build
> doesn't fail, all my code is being executed (some debug log messages
> helping me here) and the final result doesn't have my parameters. it looks
> like it is getting overwritten or discarded in some later process/step.
>
> ideas?
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> thanks for the tips jeremie, i am going to try this.
>>
>>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

ok so i have made some changes, not exactly as you have suggested cause i
wanted to support layout and logic too, but i can't even get a single
parameter to be copied up.


so i added a new attribute to the component guide class, and i am
collecting the gear_PSets added. moving forward if the custom property has
'gear_' in front then its to be copied...

>gear\xsi\rig\component\guide.py

self.tra[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform
self.atra.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform)
self.pos[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation
self.apos.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation)
gearProps = obj.Properties.Filter(c.siCustomParamSet, c.siPropertyFamily,
"gear_*")
self.cpsets.extend(list(gearProps))

then in main component class, i added three new methods

def step_01(self):
self.getHost()
self.addParameters()
self.addLayout()
self.addLogic()
self.addCustomParameters()
self.addCustomLayout()
self.addCustomLogic()
self.setUI()
return

lets ignore layout and logic at this time and look at adding simple new
parameters...

def addCustomParameters(self):

for cpset in self.guide.cpsets:
for param in cpset.Parameters:
# skip string type ie. layout and logic params, also skip debug
flag
if param.ValueType == c.siString or param.Name == "debug":
continue
self.addAnimParam(param.ScriptName, param.ValueType,\
param.Value, param.Min, param.Max, param.SuggestedMin,\
param.SuggestedMax)

i chose to use addAnimParam thinking it would fall in line better with the
GEAR system. also so i can have the setUI() take care of the gui. i tried
adding the parameters after the setUI() and used AddParameter2() softimage
method directly on the anim_prop but it seems to get overwritten. the build
doesn't fail, all my code is being executed (some debug log messages
helping me here) and the final result doesn't have my parameters. it looks
like it is getting overwritten or discarded in some later process/step.

ideas?


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:

> thanks for the tips jeremie, i am going to try this.
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Alan Fregtman]

I really dig this idea. It's too bad writing attributes was only made
decent in SI|2013.



On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:36 AM, Sebastian Kowalski  wrote:

> when performance is an issue with an ice shape rig, try to freeze the
> shape clusters into ice attributes ;)
> a smart setup would allow regeneration or addition of new shapes.
>
> sebastian
>
>
> Am 24.04.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Sandy Sutherland  >:
>
> > Enrique -
> >
> > Here are 3 snips - the one is showing the very basic compound that I
> load in when first building the tree that allows me to connect a shape on
> one input and a controller on the other - then the shape is hooked up ready
> to go!  Second one is in that basic compound and the third one is modified
> to allow inputting one shape such as a blink modelled both sides and
> splitting it using a weight map, instead of using modulate by weight map
> and making two shapes - this one also allows a switch so you switch which
> side you want the shape to be!  This sort of stuff is so easy using ICE, as
> you can also use this method to modify a shape with a weight map rather
> than makng a new shape!  Notice alsoe the rescale node this allows me to
> use controllers that go negative values say - in my example the Face GUI
> had the controllers working in the direction the shape would go i.e. cheeks
> puffing to make it intuitive for the animators - I then rescale 0 to -1 to
> +1 and done!  Beats the hassle o!
>  f wiring up a linked setup!
> >
> > S.
> >
> >
> > On 2013/04/24 5:15 AM, Enrique Caballero wrote:
> >> Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound is
> incredibly attractive.
> >>
> >> I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.
> >>
> >> If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer
> that would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is
> quite lacking
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > 
>
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Miquel Campos]

hello,

I am a little late on the conversation, but here is a screen capture of our
facial template
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-kzEZDSsRCio/T0VISL78wgI/AQw/d-ik9QG3LLc/s1600/gear-custom-modules-02.jpg

It is a mix between ICE and Gear custom components. For this specific case
, everything is pre assembled, for make the rig faster. With the system
Left and Right  shapes are split automatic and later I am using some wmaps
and a dummie envelope to split more some of the shapes. I remember
this approach was discuss here before :P







Miquel Campos
www.akaosaru.com



2013/4/24 Enrique Caballero 

> Thanks Guys this is very helpful.
>
> Thanks for the explanation and screenshots Sandy.
>
> The major difference between your approach and mine was that you use
> Linear Interpolate.  And I was multiplying the shape vectors by the scalar
> that was returned from the controller position.
>
> I wonder if that could be part of the cause of my rigs slowness
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Peter Agg wrote:
>
>> I'd also avoid doing things with weightmaps as much as possible - far
>> better to do all those calculations outside the rig and then freezing the
>> shape on export. It's better to keep them live when you're working on the
>> rig as then any changes you make to the reference mesh will be carried over
>> without needing to re-make the cluster.
>>
>>
>> On 24 April 2013 09:36, Sebastian Kowalski  wrote:
>>
>>> when performance is an issue with an ice shape rig, try to freeze the
>>> shape clusters into ice attributes ;)
>>> a smart setup would allow regeneration or addition of new shapes.
>>>
>>> sebastian
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 24.04.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Sandy Sutherland <
>>> sandy.mailli...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> > Enrique -
>>> >
>>> > Here are 3 snips - the one is showing the very basic compound that I
>>> load in when first building the tree that allows me to connect a shape on
>>> one input and a controller on the other - then the shape is hooked up ready
>>> to go!  Second one is in that basic compound and the third one is modified
>>> to allow inputting one shape such as a blink modelled both sides and
>>> splitting it using a weight map, instead of using modulate by weight map
>>> and making two shapes - this one also allows a switch so you switch which
>>> side you want the shape to be!  This sort of stuff is so easy using ICE, as
>>> you can also use this method to modify a shape with a weight map rather
>>> than makng a new shape!  Notice alsoe the rescale node this allows me to
>>> use controllers that go negative values say - in my example the Face GUI
>>> had the controllers working in the direction the shape would go i.e. cheeks
>>> puffing to make it intuitive for the animators - I then rescale 0 to -1 to
>>> +1 and done!  Beats the hassle o!
>>>  f wiring up a linked setup!
>>> >
>>> > S.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 2013/04/24 5:15 AM, Enrique Caballero wrote:
>>> >> Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound
>>> is incredibly attractive.
>>> >>
>>> >> I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.
>>> >>
>>> >> If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer
>>> that would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is
>>> quite lacking
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Enrique Caballero]

Thanks Guys this is very helpful.

Thanks for the explanation and screenshots Sandy.

The major difference between your approach and mine was that you use Linear
Interpolate.  And I was multiplying the shape vectors by the scalar that
was returned from the controller position.

I wonder if that could be part of the cause of my rigs slowness



On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Peter Agg  wrote:

> I'd also avoid doing things with weightmaps as much as possible - far
> better to do all those calculations outside the rig and then freezing the
> shape on export. It's better to keep them live when you're working on the
> rig as then any changes you make to the reference mesh will be carried over
> without needing to re-make the cluster.
>
>
> On 24 April 2013 09:36, Sebastian Kowalski  wrote:
>
>> when performance is an issue with an ice shape rig, try to freeze the
>> shape clusters into ice attributes ;)
>> a smart setup would allow regeneration or addition of new shapes.
>>
>> sebastian
>>
>>
>> Am 24.04.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Sandy Sutherland <
>> sandy.mailli...@gmail.com>:
>>
>> > Enrique -
>> >
>> > Here are 3 snips - the one is showing the very basic compound that I
>> load in when first building the tree that allows me to connect a shape on
>> one input and a controller on the other - then the shape is hooked up ready
>> to go!  Second one is in that basic compound and the third one is modified
>> to allow inputting one shape such as a blink modelled both sides and
>> splitting it using a weight map, instead of using modulate by weight map
>> and making two shapes - this one also allows a switch so you switch which
>> side you want the shape to be!  This sort of stuff is so easy using ICE, as
>> you can also use this method to modify a shape with a weight map rather
>> than makng a new shape!  Notice alsoe the rescale node this allows me to
>> use controllers that go negative values say - in my example the Face GUI
>> had the controllers working in the direction the shape would go i.e. cheeks
>> puffing to make it intuitive for the animators - I then rescale 0 to -1 to
>> +1 and done!  Beats the hassle o!
>>  f wiring up a linked setup!
>> >
>> > S.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 2013/04/24 5:15 AM, Enrique Caballero wrote:
>> >> Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound
>> is incredibly attractive.
>> >>
>> >> I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.
>> >>
>> >> If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer
>> that would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is
>> quite lacking
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> > 
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Peter Agg]

I'd also avoid doing things with weightmaps as much as possible - far
better to do all those calculations outside the rig and then freezing the
shape on export. It's better to keep them live when you're working on the
rig as then any changes you make to the reference mesh will be carried over
without needing to re-make the cluster.


On 24 April 2013 09:36, Sebastian Kowalski  wrote:

> when performance is an issue with an ice shape rig, try to freeze the
> shape clusters into ice attributes ;)
> a smart setup would allow regeneration or addition of new shapes.
>
> sebastian
>
>
> Am 24.04.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Sandy Sutherland  >:
>
> > Enrique -
> >
> > Here are 3 snips - the one is showing the very basic compound that I
> load in when first building the tree that allows me to connect a shape on
> one input and a controller on the other - then the shape is hooked up ready
> to go!  Second one is in that basic compound and the third one is modified
> to allow inputting one shape such as a blink modelled both sides and
> splitting it using a weight map, instead of using modulate by weight map
> and making two shapes - this one also allows a switch so you switch which
> side you want the shape to be!  This sort of stuff is so easy using ICE, as
> you can also use this method to modify a shape with a weight map rather
> than makng a new shape!  Notice alsoe the rescale node this allows me to
> use controllers that go negative values say - in my example the Face GUI
> had the controllers working in the direction the shape would go i.e. cheeks
> puffing to make it intuitive for the animators - I then rescale 0 to -1 to
> +1 and done!  Beats the hassle o!
>  f wiring up a linked setup!
> >
> > S.
> >
> >
> > On 2013/04/24 5:15 AM, Enrique Caballero wrote:
> >> Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound is
> incredibly attractive.
> >>
> >> I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.
> >>
> >> If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer
> that would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is
> quite lacking
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > 
>
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Sebastian Kowalski]

when performance is an issue with an ice shape rig, try to freeze the shape 
clusters into ice attributes ;)
a smart setup would allow regeneration or addition of new shapes.

sebastian


Am 24.04.2013 um 10:24 schrieb Sandy Sutherland :

> Enrique -
> 
> Here are 3 snips - the one is showing the very basic compound that I load in 
> when first building the tree that allows me to connect a shape on one input 
> and a controller on the other - then the shape is hooked up ready to go!  
> Second one is in that basic compound and the third one is modified to allow 
> inputting one shape such as a blink modelled both sides and splitting it 
> using a weight map, instead of using modulate by weight map and making two 
> shapes - this one also allows a switch so you switch which side you want the 
> shape to be!  This sort of stuff is so easy using ICE, as you can also use 
> this method to modify a shape with a weight map rather than makng a new 
> shape!  Notice alsoe the rescale node this allows me to use controllers that 
> go negative values say - in my example the Face GUI had the controllers 
> working in the direction the shape would go i.e. cheeks puffing to make it 
> intuitive for the animators - I then rescale 0 to -1 to +1 and done!  Beats 
> the hassle o!
 f wiring up a linked setup!
> 
> S.
> 
> 
> On 2013/04/24 5:15 AM, Enrique Caballero wrote:
>> Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound is 
>> incredibly attractive.
>> 
>> I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.
>> 
>> If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer that 
>> would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is quite 
>> lacking
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

Re: GEAR question

[Sandy Sutherland]

I did a rigging job recently with several characters needed to be rigged 
pretty quickly - so I went the ICE tree setup - worked really well - 
saved out a compound and could script in a rebuild that read it in and 
stuck it onto the new character - obviously naming convention needed to 
be pretty solid, but I built it so that one node fed the entire tree 
name wise so that if needed I could correct that in one go!


S.

On 2013/04/23 11:38 PM, Steven Caron wrote:
it might be more than i need right now, i just need shapes on the 
meshes to be wired back up to parameters when i rebuild the rig. i am 
exploring using an ice tree that gets automatically resolved when gear 
imports the mesh/emdl.



On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jeremie Passerin > wrote:


Going back to the Gear topic.
Xml shape export was planned to be part of the skin rebuild. I
have most of the code ready but never got time to implement it
properly :( If anyone feels like finishing the job I can share the
code.


On 23 April 2013 14:06, Matt Morris mailto:matt...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I tend to use a bunch of scene objects imported as a generic
model, then load the ice tree onto the mesh which hooks up to
the controllers. I did try a comparison test on a face rig a
while back comparing playback speeds of traditional setup and
ice setup and found I was getting better playback via the ice
method, so haven't really investigated too much further. The
characters I've rigged are much simpler than film level assets
though, so ymmv.


On 23 April 2013 21:50, Alan Fregtman mailto:alan.fregt...@gmail.com>> wrote:

On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE
shape mixer...

Do you directly use a controller's local transform to
drive a shape, or do you use a kind of "buffer" custom
parameter set to which you hook up controls via expressions?

The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather
slow when you use GetDatas to get transformations from
objects in the scene. I suspect it may mistakenly dirty
the dependency graph and force some things to run twice.




On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris
mailto:matt...@gmail.com>> wrote:

You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should
connect up on re-import or with common names on a
fresh mesh.




On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron mailto:car...@gmail.com>> wrote:

how are people doing shape animation with a gear
rig? i need to be able to have my shapes connect
to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.

s




-- 
www.matinai.com 






-- 
www.matinai.com 

Re: GEAR question

[Enrique Caballero]

Very good point.  And the plug-in play nature of an ICETree compound is
incredibly attractive.

 I'm always open to trying something new and different if time allows.

If anyone can screenshot how they set up their ICE Tree Shape mixer that
would be awesome.  I think my knowledge about optimising ICETree's is quite
lacking




On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 11:10 AM, Raffaele Fragapane <
raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote:

> You might very well be doing everything right. If there's anything I would
> go for ICE shapes over anything else for, it's not raw speed (which on low
> density meshes with many simple shapes and 1:1 controls make bugger all
> difference), it's because you can usually, considerably, reduce the number
> of shapes, often by a factor of 2 or more.
>
> Combinatorial systems go from a major pain to set up and a delicate thing,
> to being wired on the fly with just a couple reference meshes as templates
> and very quick wiring in and out.
>
> It's far from a given that, in a 1:1 scenario, ICE will zip past the mixer
> in performance. It much depends on context, rig and geo.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Enrique Caballero <
> enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yep that is definitely a huge plus. But writing a script to recreate a
>> mixer wouldn't be that painful.
>>
>> I work for a very small shop. We concentrate on doing quality work on low
>> budgets.
>>
>> So I am always trying to squeeze every last FPS out of our rigs, as I
>> strongly believe that a fast rig has a very large effect on company moral,
>> and production costs.
>>
>> So when I did my ice tests for our face rigs, i lost about 3 frames per
>> second in the end.
>>
>> I know it doesnt sound like a lot. But fight tooth and nail for every fps
>> so losing 3 hurts :P
>>
>> i bet im just making the ice trees incorrectly though, there might be
>> something im missing
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Simon Anderson <
>> simonbenandersonl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The nice thing about ICE is its also easy to setup and apply repatativly
>>> as you just copy and paste your ICE setup. We used the ICE blendshapes on
>>> both Zambezia and Khumba.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Enrique Caballero <
>>> enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Hey guys, could I ask you to show an Ice tree of your ICE Shape Mixer.

 I've done extensive testing with using ICE for shapes.  Basically I
 just added all of the vectors together and drove them by the kinematics of
 the controls.  I also did my best to make sure that it didnt calculate
 certain things twice.

 I tested it against a face rig that we use here that uses a normal
 mixer.  And when all 180 shapes got reconnected. The Old School Mixer was
 faster.

 I ran 3 seperate tests and in the end the Old Mixer was faster than
 doing it with ice.

 I am very open minded and I may have done this incorrectly. can anyone
 offer suggestions or show me a tree of one of theirs?




 On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Laforge <
 guillaume.laforge...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow
> :).
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman <
> alan.fregt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>>
>> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape,
>> or do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook 
>> up
>> controls via expressions?
>>
>> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when
>> you use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I
>> suspect it may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some 
>> things
>> to run twice.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris wrote:
>>
>>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
 able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
 build/rebuild.

 s

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.matinai.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ---
>>> Simon Ben Anderson
>>> blog: http://vinyldevelopment.wordpress.com/
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
> and let them flee like the dogs they are!
>

Re: GEAR question

[Raffaele Fragapane]

You might very well be doing everything right. If there's anything I would
go for ICE shapes over anything else for, it's not raw speed (which on low
density meshes with many simple shapes and 1:1 controls make bugger all
difference), it's because you can usually, considerably, reduce the number
of shapes, often by a factor of 2 or more.

Combinatorial systems go from a major pain to set up and a delicate thing,
to being wired on the fly with just a couple reference meshes as templates
and very quick wiring in and out.

It's far from a given that, in a 1:1 scenario, ICE will zip past the mixer
in performance. It much depends on context, rig and geo.


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Enrique Caballero <
enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Yep that is definitely a huge plus. But writing a script to recreate a
> mixer wouldn't be that painful.
>
> I work for a very small shop. We concentrate on doing quality work on low
> budgets.
>
> So I am always trying to squeeze every last FPS out of our rigs, as I
> strongly believe that a fast rig has a very large effect on company moral,
> and production costs.
>
> So when I did my ice tests for our face rigs, i lost about 3 frames per
> second in the end.
>
> I know it doesnt sound like a lot. But fight tooth and nail for every fps
> so losing 3 hurts :P
>
> i bet im just making the ice trees incorrectly though, there might be
> something im missing
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Simon Anderson <
> simonbenandersonl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The nice thing about ICE is its also easy to setup and apply repatativly
>> as you just copy and paste your ICE setup. We used the ICE blendshapes on
>> both Zambezia and Khumba.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Enrique Caballero <
>> enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey guys, could I ask you to show an Ice tree of your ICE Shape Mixer.
>>>
>>> I've done extensive testing with using ICE for shapes.  Basically I just
>>> added all of the vectors together and drove them by the kinematics of the
>>> controls.  I also did my best to make sure that it didnt calculate certain
>>> things twice.
>>>
>>> I tested it against a face rig that we use here that uses a normal
>>> mixer.  And when all 180 shapes got reconnected. The Old School Mixer was
>>> faster.
>>>
>>> I ran 3 seperate tests and in the end the Old Mixer was faster than
>>> doing it with ice.
>>>
>>> I am very open minded and I may have done this incorrectly. can anyone
>>> offer suggestions or show me a tree of one of theirs?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Laforge <
>>> guillaume.laforge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow :).


 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman >>> > wrote:

> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>
> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape,
> or do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
> controls via expressions?
>
> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
> use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect 
> it
> may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
> twice.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris wrote:
>
>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
>>> able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
>>> build/rebuild.
>>>
>>> s
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>

>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> Simon Ben Anderson
>> blog: http://vinyldevelopment.wordpress.com/
>>
>
>


-- 
Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it
and let them flee like the dogs they are!

Re: GEAR question

[Enrique Caballero]

Yep that is definitely a huge plus. But writing a script to recreate a
mixer wouldn't be that painful.

I work for a very small shop. We concentrate on doing quality work on low
budgets.

So I am always trying to squeeze every last FPS out of our rigs, as I
strongly believe that a fast rig has a very large effect on company moral,
and production costs.

So when I did my ice tests for our face rigs, i lost about 3 frames per
second in the end.

I know it doesnt sound like a lot. But fight tooth and nail for every fps
so losing 3 hurts :P

i bet im just making the ice trees incorrectly though, there might be
something im missing


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Simon Anderson <
simonbenandersonl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The nice thing about ICE is its also easy to setup and apply repatativly
> as you just copy and paste your ICE setup. We used the ICE blendshapes on
> both Zambezia and Khumba.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Enrique Caballero <
> enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hey guys, could I ask you to show an Ice tree of your ICE Shape Mixer.
>>
>> I've done extensive testing with using ICE for shapes.  Basically I just
>> added all of the vectors together and drove them by the kinematics of the
>> controls.  I also did my best to make sure that it didnt calculate certain
>> things twice.
>>
>> I tested it against a face rig that we use here that uses a normal mixer.
>>  And when all 180 shapes got reconnected. The Old School Mixer was faster.
>>
>> I ran 3 seperate tests and in the end the Old Mixer was faster than doing
>> it with ice.
>>
>> I am very open minded and I may have done this incorrectly. can anyone
>> offer suggestions or show me a tree of one of theirs?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Laforge <
>> guillaume.laforge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow :).
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...

 Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
 do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
 controls via expressions?

 The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
 use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
 may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
 twice.




 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:

> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>
>
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
>> able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
>> build/rebuild.
>>
>> s
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>


>>>
>>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Simon Ben Anderson
> blog: http://vinyldevelopment.wordpress.com/
>

Re: GEAR question

[Simon Anderson]

The nice thing about ICE is its also easy to setup and apply repatativly as
you just copy and paste your ICE setup. We used the ICE blendshapes on both
Zambezia and Khumba.


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Enrique Caballero <
enriquecaball...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hey guys, could I ask you to show an Ice tree of your ICE Shape Mixer.
>
> I've done extensive testing with using ICE for shapes.  Basically I just
> added all of the vectors together and drove them by the kinematics of the
> controls.  I also did my best to make sure that it didnt calculate certain
> things twice.
>
> I tested it against a face rig that we use here that uses a normal mixer.
>  And when all 180 shapes got reconnected. The Old School Mixer was faster.
>
> I ran 3 seperate tests and in the end the Old Mixer was faster than doing
> it with ice.
>
> I am very open minded and I may have done this incorrectly. can anyone
> offer suggestions or show me a tree of one of theirs?
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Laforge <
> guillaume.laforge...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow :).
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>>>
>>> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
>>> do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
>>> controls via expressions?
>>>
>>> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
>>> use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
>>> may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
>>> twice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>>
 You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
 re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.




 On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:

> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
> able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
> build/rebuild.
>
> s
>



 --
 www.matinai.com

>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
---
Simon Ben Anderson
blog: http://vinyldevelopment.wordpress.com/

Re: GEAR question

[Enrique Caballero]

Hey guys, could I ask you to show an Ice tree of your ICE Shape Mixer.

I've done extensive testing with using ICE for shapes.  Basically I just
added all of the vectors together and drove them by the kinematics of the
controls.  I also did my best to make sure that it didnt calculate certain
things twice.

I tested it against a face rig that we use here that uses a normal mixer.
 And when all 180 shapes got reconnected. The Old School Mixer was faster.

I ran 3 seperate tests and in the end the Old Mixer was faster than doing
it with ice.

I am very open minded and I may have done this incorrectly. can anyone
offer suggestions or show me a tree of one of theirs?




On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 8:24 AM, Guillaume Laforge <
guillaume.laforge...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow :).
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman wrote:
>
>> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>>
>> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
>> do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
>> controls via expressions?
>>
>> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
>> use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
>> may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
>> twice.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>
>>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
 to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.

 s

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.matinai.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Guillaume Laforge]

Getting Kinematics Data is not slow. Setting Kinematics Data IS slow :).


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Alan Fregtman wrote:

> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>
> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or do
> you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
> controls via expressions?
>
> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you use
> GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it may
> mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run twice.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>
>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
>>> to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>>>
>>> s
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

really no hard feeling Steven, I know what is to work in a small studio and
I know what is development ;-)


On 23 April 2013 16:54, Steven Caron  wrote:

> thanks for the tips jeremie, i am going to try this.
>
> by the way, i already stated in an earlier email that my budget is the
> issue.
>
> "i am very appreciative of a free and open solution... i can't get the
> budget usually to extend gear enough to suit my needs, so i have to use it
> as is."
>
> as someone who gives out free and open sourced tools regularly, you don't
> have to justify anything to me. i appreciate all of your hard work and
> generosity.
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>
>> It's free and open source... but I'm not feeling responsible to make it
>> work in every studio's pipeline.
>>  You don't have the budget to extend gear, you don't have the budget to
>> build your own solution... the problem is not gear... it's your budget. :-)
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

thanks for the tips jeremie, i am going to try this.

by the way, i already stated in an earlier email that my budget is the
issue.

"i am very appreciative of a free and open solution... i can't get the
budget usually to extend gear enough to suit my needs, so i have to use it
as is."

as someone who gives out free and open sourced tools regularly, you don't
have to justify anything to me. i appreciate all of your hard work and
generosity.

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> It's free and open source... but I'm not feeling responsible to make it
> work in every studio's pipeline.
>  You don't have the budget to extend gear, you don't have the budget to
> build your own solution... the problem is not gear... it's your budget. :-)
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

oh I said dictionary and I used a list..
also note that I have prefixed the property with "Save" because you don't
want to save and copy all the properties form the object :)


On 23 April 2013 16:41, Jeremie Passerin  wrote:

> First thing I would do is to grab the property from the guide.
> Right now it's only grabbing the transform, position and primitive.
>
> in gear\xsi\rig\component\guide.py   in setFromHierarchy()
>
> I would had a dictionary where I could store the property
> just after
>
> self.tra[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform
> self.atra.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform)
> self.pos[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation
> self.apos.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation)
> > self.properties.extend( list( obj.Properties("Save*") ) ) #you probably
> need to chck that the result is not None
>
> That wouldn't work with building the rig from an xml file.. but I don't
> think you care about that.
>
> then in gear\xsi\rig\component\__init__.py   in MainComponent.step_01()
>
> I would add an extra method that would grab this property and add the
> parameters the anim_prop
>
> def step_01(self):
> self.getHost()
> self.addParameters()
> self.addLayout()
> self.addLogic()
> self.setUI()
> > self.copyGuideProperties()
> return
>
> def copyGuideProperties( self ):
>
>for prop in self.guide.properties:
>   for param in prop.Parameters:
> # Do whatever is needed to copy the property
> self.anim_prop.AddParameters( #Copy of the parameter)
>
>
>
>
>
> For the rest what can I say... no worries Steven, I am well-aware that
> gear might not suit all the needs of production.
>
> I developed gear at sixbrids. It was supposed to be the base of our
> rigging and animation tool set before the company went down. We haven't
> used it in production and I'm sure we would have added a lot more and
> address all these issues if we actually used it. It's free and open
> source... but I'm not feeling responsible to make it work in every studio's
> pipeline.
> You don't have the budget to extend gear, you don't have the budget to
> build your own solution... the problem is not gear... it's your budget. :-)
>
> Hope it helps !
>
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 16:16, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> hey jeremie
>>
>> where should i look in the gear source if i wanted to move an existing
>> gear_PSet applied to a guide and move it the component in the final rig?
>> ie. add parameters using (shift+p), add layout and logic in the gear_PSet
>> text widget. click build and this be copied up to the final rig.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> ok, so here is where i usually get caught up in gear. don't take it
>>> personally, i am very appreciative of a free and open solution, but i
>>> usually hit this wall. i can't get the budget usually to extend gear enough
>>> to suit my needs, so i have to use it as is.
>>>
>>> s
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Jeremie Passerin 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 oh maybe I misunderstood your question... the parameters won't persist
 if you rebuild the rigs. :(

 This is just to add a parameter to an existing rig... but otherwise
 yeah parameter and layout will persist.


 On 23 April 2013 15:40, Steven Caron  wrote:

> ok i can work with this..
>
> so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic.
> click generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the
> existing properties? like anim_prop?
>
> i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
> s
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin  > wrote:
>
>> gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
>> After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's
>> also decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
>> You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet.
>> (I don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly
>> you just need to select the property and in the menu you should have
>> something like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you
>> should have an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic.
>> Youhave a button to generate a default layout if that helps.
>>
>> it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
>> http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172
>>
>> On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that
>> includes a new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of 
>> the
>> whole Blur pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once
>> it's been tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I 
>> think
>> you would like it.
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> so how do i just add simpl

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

First thing I would do is to grab the property from the guide.
Right now it's only grabbing the transform, position and primitive.

in gear\xsi\rig\component\guide.py   in setFromHierarchy()

I would had a dictionary where I could store the property
just after

self.tra[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform
self.atra.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform)
self.pos[name] = obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation
self.apos.append(obj.Kinematics.Global.Transform.Translation)
> self.properties.extend( list( obj.Properties("Save*") ) ) #you probably
need to chck that the result is not None

That wouldn't work with building the rig from an xml file.. but I don't
think you care about that.

then in gear\xsi\rig\component\__init__.py   in MainComponent.step_01()

I would add an extra method that would grab this property and add the
parameters the anim_prop

def step_01(self):
self.getHost()
self.addParameters()
self.addLayout()
self.addLogic()
self.setUI()
> self.copyGuideProperties()
return

def copyGuideProperties( self ):

   for prop in self.guide.properties:
  for param in prop.Parameters:
# Do whatever is needed to copy the property
self.anim_prop.AddParameters( #Copy of the parameter)





For the rest what can I say... no worries Steven, I am well-aware that gear
might not suit all the needs of production.

I developed gear at sixbrids. It was supposed to be the base of our rigging
and animation tool set before the company went down. We haven't used it in
production and I'm sure we would have added a lot more and address all
these issues if we actually used it. It's free and open source... but I'm
not feeling responsible to make it work in every studio's pipeline.
You don't have the budget to extend gear, you don't have the budget to
build your own solution... the problem is not gear... it's your budget. :-)

Hope it helps !



On 23 April 2013 16:16, Steven Caron  wrote:

> hey jeremie
>
> where should i look in the gear source if i wanted to move an existing
> gear_PSet applied to a guide and move it the component in the final rig?
> ie. add parameters using (shift+p), add layout and logic in the gear_PSet
> text widget. click build and this be copied up to the final rig.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> ok, so here is where i usually get caught up in gear. don't take it
>> personally, i am very appreciative of a free and open solution, but i
>> usually hit this wall. i can't get the budget usually to extend gear enough
>> to suit my needs, so i have to use it as is.
>>
>> s
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>>
>>> oh maybe I misunderstood your question... the parameters won't persist
>>> if you rebuild the rigs. :(
>>>
>>> This is just to add a parameter to an existing rig... but otherwise yeah
>>> parameter and layout will persist.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 15:40, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 ok i can work with this..

 so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic.
 click generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the
 existing properties? like anim_prop?

 i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
 s


 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin 
 wrote:

> gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
> After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's
> also decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
> You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet.
> (I don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly
> you just need to select the property and in the menu you should have
> something like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you
> should have an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic.
> Youhave a button to generate a default layout if that helps.
>
> it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
> http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172
>
> On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that
> includes a new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the
> whole Blur pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once
> it's been tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think
> you would like it.
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat
>> list?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron wrote:
>>
>>> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it
>>> wasn't so tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin <
>>> gerem@gmail.com> wrote:


 The Bl

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

hey jeremie

where should i look in the gear source if i wanted to move an existing
gear_PSet applied to a guide and move it the component in the final rig?
ie. add parameters using (shift+p), add layout and logic in the gear_PSet
text widget. click build and this be copied up to the final rig.


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:

> ok, so here is where i usually get caught up in gear. don't take it
> personally, i am very appreciative of a free and open solution, but i
> usually hit this wall. i can't get the budget usually to extend gear enough
> to suit my needs, so i have to use it as is.
>
> s
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>
>> oh maybe I misunderstood your question... the parameters won't persist if
>> you rebuild the rigs. :(
>>
>> This is just to add a parameter to an existing rig... but otherwise yeah
>> parameter and layout will persist.
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 15:40, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> ok i can work with this..
>>>
>>> so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic. click
>>> generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the existing
>>> properties? like anim_prop?
>>>
>>> i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
>>> s
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
 After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's
 also decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
 You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet.
 (I don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly
 you just need to select the property and in the menu you should have
 something like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you
 should have an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic.
 Youhave a button to generate a default layout if that helps.

 it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
 http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172

 On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that includes
 a new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the whole
 Blur pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once it's
 been tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think you
 would like it.


 On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:

> so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat
> list?
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron wrote:
>
>> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it
>> wasn't so tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin <
>> gerem@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
>>> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>>>
>>>
>

>>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

ok, so here is where i usually get caught up in gear. don't take it
personally, i am very appreciative of a free and open solution, but i
usually hit this wall. i can't get the budget usually to extend gear enough
to suit my needs, so i have to use it as is.

s


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> oh maybe I misunderstood your question... the parameters won't persist if
> you rebuild the rigs. :(
>
> This is just to add a parameter to an existing rig... but otherwise yeah
> parameter and layout will persist.
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 15:40, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> ok i can work with this..
>>
>> so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic. click
>> generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the existing
>> properties? like anim_prop?
>>
>> i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
>> s
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>>
>>> gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
>>> After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's also
>>> decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
>>> You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet. (I
>>> don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly you
>>> just need to select the property and in the menu you should have something
>>> like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you should have
>>> an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic. Youhave a button
>>> to generate a default layout if that helps.
>>>
>>> it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
>>> http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172
>>>
>>> On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that includes
>>> a new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the whole
>>> Blur pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once it's
>>> been tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think you
>>> would like it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat list?


 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:

> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't
> so tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin  > wrote:
>>
>>
>> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
>> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>>
>>

>>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

oh maybe I misunderstood your question... the parameters won't persist if
you rebuild the rigs. :(

This is just to add a parameter to an existing rig... but otherwise yeah
parameter and layout will persist.


On 23 April 2013 15:40, Steven Caron  wrote:

> ok i can work with this..
>
> so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic. click
> generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the existing
> properties? like anim_prop?
>
> i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
> s
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>
>> gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
>> After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's also
>> decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
>> You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet. (I
>> don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly you
>> just need to select the property and in the menu you should have something
>> like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you should have
>> an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic. Youhave a button
>> to generate a default layout if that helps.
>>
>> it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
>> http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172
>>
>> On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that includes a
>> new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the whole Blur
>> pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once it's been
>> tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think you would
>> like it.
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat list?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't
 so tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)


 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin 
 wrote:
>
>
> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>
>
>>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

ok i can work with this..

so add parameters from the gui, then type in the layout and logic. click
generate logic. these parameters should persist? can i reuse the existing
properties? like anim_prop?

i too hope you can share it :) good luck!
s


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:26 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
> After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's also
> decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
> You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet. (I
> don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly you
> just need to select the property and in the menu you should have something
> like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you should have
> an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic. Youhave a button
> to generate a default layout if that helps.
>
> it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
> http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172
>
> On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that includes a
> new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the whole Blur
> pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once it's been
> tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think you would
> like it.
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat list?
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't
>>> so tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin 
>>> wrote:


 The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
 deleting everything is very interesting too.


>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

gear_PSet is a regular property that can save it's own layout.
After adding a parameter to the property you need to make sure it's also
decribe in the layout, otherwise it doesn't show up.
You can see the layout by activating the debug mode of the Gear_PSet. (I
don't have gear installed here right now, but if I remember correctly you
just need to select the property and in the menu you should have something
like Debug Parameter Set ) Now when you open the property you should have
an extra tab showing the code of the layout and the logic. Youhave a button
to generate a default layout if that helps.

it's an extension of what Daniel Niero describe here :
http://www.softimageblog.com/archives/172

On a side note, I'm working on new tools here at Blur and that includes a
new rig builder that is more flexible and less dependant of the whole Blur
pipeline stuff... I secretely hope to be able to share it once it's been
tested. It's a combination of gear and Mega Rig Builder. I think you would
like it.


On 23 April 2013 15:07, Steven Caron  wrote:

> so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat list?
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't so
>> tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
>>> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>>>
>>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

so how do i just add simple parameters to a gear_PSet? just a flat list?


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:04 PM, Steven Caron  wrote:

> you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't so
> tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>>
>>
>> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
>> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>>
>>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

you don't have to remind me of that, i miss it sooo much. if it wasn't so
tied to blur pipeline i would be using it :)

On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>
>
> The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
> deleting everything is very interesting too.
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

Yeah I can imagine that.

Honnestly I love the xml export but it's a lot of dev to have it work with
everything. Once you have it working with envelopes and shapes... you still
need to support ice deformers, push, relax or any deformers you might want
to use... even custom stuff and weight map... That's a lot of dev...

The Blur way where you can actually rebuild part of the rigs without
deleting everything is very interesting too.


On 23 April 2013 14:38, Steven Caron  wrote:

> it might be more than i need right now, i just need shapes on the meshes
> to be wired back up to parameters when i rebuild the rig. i am exploring
> using an ice tree that gets automatically resolved when gear imports the
> mesh/emdl.
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:
>
>> Going back to the Gear topic.
>> Xml shape export was planned to be part of the skin rebuild. I have most
>> of the code ready but never got time to implement it properly :( If anyone
>> feels like finishing the job I can share the code.
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 14:06, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>
>>> I tend to use a bunch of scene objects imported as a generic model, then
>>> load the ice tree onto the mesh which hooks up to the controllers. I did
>>> try a comparison test on a face rig a while back comparing playback speeds
>>> of traditional setup and ice setup and found I was getting better playback
>>> via the ice method, so haven't really investigated too much further. The
>>> characters I've rigged are much simpler than film level assets though, so
>>> ymmv.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 21:50, Alan Fregtman  wrote:
>>>
 On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...

 Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
 do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
 controls via expressions?

 The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
 use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
 may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
 twice.




 On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:

> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>
>
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
>> able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
>> build/rebuild.
>>
>> s
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>


>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.matinai.com
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

it might be more than i need right now, i just need shapes on the meshes to
be wired back up to parameters when i rebuild the rig. i am exploring using
an ice tree that gets automatically resolved when gear imports the
mesh/emdl.


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Jeremie Passerin wrote:

> Going back to the Gear topic.
> Xml shape export was planned to be part of the skin rebuild. I have most
> of the code ready but never got time to implement it properly :( If anyone
> feels like finishing the job I can share the code.
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 14:06, Matt Morris  wrote:
>
>> I tend to use a bunch of scene objects imported as a generic model, then
>> load the ice tree onto the mesh which hooks up to the controllers. I did
>> try a comparison test on a face rig a while back comparing playback speeds
>> of traditional setup and ice setup and found I was getting better playback
>> via the ice method, so haven't really investigated too much further. The
>> characters I've rigged are much simpler than film level assets though, so
>> ymmv.
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 21:50, Alan Fregtman  wrote:
>>
>>> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>>>
>>> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
>>> do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
>>> controls via expressions?
>>>
>>> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
>>> use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
>>> may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
>>> twice.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>>
 You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
 re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.




 On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:

> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be
> able to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every
> build/rebuild.
>
> s
>



 --
 www.matinai.com

>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Jeremie Passerin]

Going back to the Gear topic.
Xml shape export was planned to be part of the skin rebuild. I have most of
the code ready but never got time to implement it properly :( If anyone
feels like finishing the job I can share the code.


On 23 April 2013 14:06, Matt Morris  wrote:

> I tend to use a bunch of scene objects imported as a generic model, then
> load the ice tree onto the mesh which hooks up to the controllers. I did
> try a comparison test on a face rig a while back comparing playback speeds
> of traditional setup and ice setup and found I was getting better playback
> via the ice method, so haven't really investigated too much further. The
> characters I've rigged are much simpler than film level assets though, so
> ymmv.
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 21:50, Alan Fregtman  wrote:
>
>> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>>
>> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or
>> do you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
>> controls via expressions?
>>
>> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you
>> use GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it
>> may mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run
>> twice.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>>
>>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>>
 how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
 to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.

 s

>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> www.matinai.com
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>

Re: GEAR question

[Matt Morris]

I tend to use a bunch of scene objects imported as a generic model, then
load the ice tree onto the mesh which hooks up to the controllers. I did
try a comparison test on a face rig a while back comparing playback speeds
of traditional setup and ice setup and found I was getting better playback
via the ice method, so haven't really investigated too much further. The
characters I've rigged are much simpler than film level assets though, so
ymmv.


On 23 April 2013 21:50, Alan Fregtman  wrote:

> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>
> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or do
> you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
> controls via expressions?
>
> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you use
> GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it may
> mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run twice.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>
>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
>>> to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>>>
>>> s
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>


-- 
www.matinai.com

Re: GEAR question

[Miquel Campos]

I use to take the kinematics to drive the shapes :)  But never try to check
if exist better way, since I didn't found any issue .




Miquel Campos
www.akaosaru.com



2013/4/23 Alan Fregtman 

> On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...
>
> Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or do
> you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
> controls via expressions?
>
> The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you use
> GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it may
> mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run twice.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:
>
>> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
>> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>>
>>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
>>> to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>>>
>>> s
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.matinai.com
>>
>
>

Re: GEAR question

[Alan Fregtman]

On that note, how do most of you guys approach the ICE shape mixer...

Do you directly use a controller's local transform to drive a shape, or do
you use a kind of "buffer" custom parameter set to which you hook up
controls via expressions?

The reason I ask is because ICE trees seem to get rather slow when you use
GetDatas to get transformations from objects in the scene. I suspect it may
mistakenly dirty the dependency graph and force some things to run twice.




On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 4:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:

> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>
>
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
>> to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>>
>> s
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>

Re: GEAR question

[Steven Caron]

i am not using an ice based shape mixer, but that is a decent idea.

so you add a new gear_PSet and just get the data on those parameters? i am
unsure of how well 'this_model' will work if the meshes are contained in
another model first then moved. i guess we will see :)


On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Matt Morris  wrote:

> You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on
> re-import or with common names on a fresh mesh.
>
>
>
>
> On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:
>
>> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able
>> to have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>>
>> s
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.matinai.com
>

Re: GEAR question

[Matt Morris]

You are using an ice shape mixer right? That should connect up on re-import
or with common names on a fresh mesh.




On 23 April 2013 19:50, Steven Caron  wrote:

> how are people doing shape animation with a gear rig? i need to be able to
> have my shapes connect to a custom parameter set on every build/rebuild.
>
> s
>



-- 
www.matinai.com