This has been pretty much my only "um..." regarding ICE. It seems to
be like a (powerful) local black box that is related to one object.
I know that an ICE graph can actually get and set data to multiple
locations, but in some cases, one needs to jump through hoops (for
example, it's difficult to read-write data from other ICE graphs...
or at least, not straight-forward). In Maya, everything is part of
the scene graph, so its a lot easier to read/write data, and find
all related operations to a certain node.
However, Maya has to have the worst node editor I've ever had to
touch. I would definitely not want to see something like that in
Softimage (or anywhere else for that matter). Every time I try to
use it, it makes me want to kick puppies, and come back flying to
the Hypergraph. I much prefer the ICE UI/workflow (I'd just like it
more if it was "global") and Modo's Schematic View (by orders of
magnitude).
On 08/01/2014 5:00 PM, Eric Thivierge
wrote:
Yeah,
ICE could do that if they keep pushing it... maybe? Though I think
it's pretty black boxed in terms of just having the high level
access to objects, not the underlying nodes.
A Node Editor like Maya plus exposing more of the internals in the
Scene Explorer would be something to look at if this ever gets any
attention.
@Emilio, we need this in Softimage as well!
On Wednesday, January 08, 2014 4:58:03 PM, Emilio Hernandez wrote:
Haha. Maybe because Maya needs it, so you
can dig in there and get it
working properly. While in Softimage not....
;) Just fueling the fire!
2014/1/8 Eric Thivierge <ethivie...@hybride.com
<mailto:ethivie...@hybride.com>>
Just because I want to fuel the fire, I'll toss in that
while the
workflow in Maya is quite flawed out of the box, you can get
to
more internals of the scene graph and manipulate it than we
have
in Softimage.
On Wednesday, January 08, 2014 4:15:04 PM, Alan Fregtman
wrote:
Bravo! Bravo!! :) I echo your exact sentiments, David
(though
my own
credentials are puny by comparison.)
The operator stack should be permanently on the box as a
"hot
feature". We all take it for granted all the time, but
seriously it's
one of the best features in Soft.
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:10 PM, Steven Caron
<car...@gmail.com
<mailto:car...@gmail.com>
<mailto:car...@gmail.com
<mailto:car...@gmail.com>>> wrote:
thank you! thank you! thank you!... i knew i wasn't
crazy
thinking
rigging in maya is a PITA!
On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 11:45 AM, David Gallagher
<davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com
<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>
<mailto:davegsoftimagelist@__gmail.com
<mailto:davegsoftimagel...@gmail.com>>>
wrote:
I rigged on quite a few characters in Maya at
Blue Sky
Studios
and now (Softimage) AnimSchool. We offer the
well-known
"Malcolm" rig for free.
There is no comparison to rigging in Softimage
and
Maya--not
the kind of rigging I do. I often assume by now
they have
better workflows in Maya, but I'm often
surprised to
find how
convoluted and limiting the workflows are to
this day.
Most
Maya people must not know there are better ways
of
working or
aren't doing the kinds of things I am, because
the
difference
is profound.
-At any point in the rigging process, you can
make
edits in
the model stack to change the shape and topology
of
the model.
After experimenting, you can freeze that part of
the
stack and
continue on with that new shape, retaining
almost
every bit of
work you've done.
YOU CAN CHANGE THE TOPOLOGY. YOU CAN CHANGE THE
SHAPE
FREELY.
This difference is huge. You can work toward
completion
without fear of losing work. You can experiment
freely--knowing it's fine if you want to make a
major
change.
I'm never afraid of losing blendshape work.
And if the changes are really significant, you
can always
Gator you're way out of a jam.
-You can do blendshape edits directly on the
geometry,
modelessly, instead of on a separate blendshape
object.
-There is no comparison with corrective
blendshapes. In
Softimage, you go to Secondary Shape mode and
drag a
few points.
In Maya, I wish you luck. You can install one of
several
plug-ins and scripts and HOPE that it works. If
the
scenario
is simple enough, it might.
Several people here tried to help a student make
a single
corrective blendshape on an elbow -- and we're
all
experienced
Maya riggers. After hours of attempting, we
threw up our
hands. There was something in that object's
history
that was
making the blendshape plug-in fail. The answer
is what it
often is: just start over.
-EDITING corrective blendshapes. In Maya, heaven
help
you if
you want to edit that blendshape later. Start
the process
again and make a new one. In Softimage, drag a
few
points and
you're done in seconds.
-For facial work, being able to make face shapes
in
conjunction with the mixer, working directly on
the
main geo.
To see other shapes muted, soloed as you're
working. This
allows you to craft shapes that work for
different
scenarios,
with just the right falloff. You can make
correctives for
shape combinations quickly. In face work, it's
all
about how
the functions combine to make the range of
expressive
results.
-The envelope weighting is far superior. The
smoothing
is just
better, and more reliable. Negative weight
painting
actually
works.
Being able to make sophisticated weighting
allows you
to make
lighter rigs, because fewer nodes and
calculations are
needed.
I can't believe someone actually compared Maya's
Component
Editor to Softimage's Weight Editor. I'm
stunned.
Sometimes, demoing Maya's envelope weighting, it
just
stops
working for no reason -- I have no idea why.
(Mind
you, I've
been rigging in Maya since 1999.)
-You can envelope/skin null objects, not just
joints.
(Yes,
Maya will let you add other objects as deformers
but it is
limiting and causes problems.)
-The tweak tool. You can grab anywhere and it
will
just get
the nearest point/edge/poly and transform it
precisely. Add
the proportional editing and it's very
sculptural without
giving up precise transform control. I far
prefer this
workflow to the Zbrush approach geared toward
paintstrokes.
-In Softimage, you can change the wireframe on
shaded
opacity.
You can change the point sizes. These mean I can
visualize and
work with the shape, not get visually stuck on
the tech
clutter like in Maya.
-LinkWithOrientation. Does Maya have anything
built-in
yet? I
know there are pose readers out there, but they
are
slow and
3rd party.
-The "smooth preview" Geometry Approximation is
better,
faster, and more stable in Softimage.
-Even with the army of tools and plug-ins we had
at
Blue Sky
Studios, I would still much rather use
off-the-shelf
Softimage.
-You can select controls without selecting (and
highlighting)
all its children. This makes it easier to
animate the
rig --
just drag selecting will get you the selectable
controls. In
Maya, drag-selecting gets a mixture of heirarchy
parts.
All this means that I can focus on the ART, the
shaping of the
rig, not jump through hoops all day.
As a result, our characters are more flexible
and
expressive.
--
|
