Harder than that, the equivalent would be to select all components, move and rotate them numerically, then figure out the reciprocal transform of what you just did and apply it to the object's transform.
Center mode is also not equivalent or obsoleted by neutral poses, nor it's equated by Maya's pivot control. It's sorely missed by many in Maya. On top of that, Maya snapping facilities, particularly when it comes to rotations, are wonky and often don't work at all. The modelling toolset, several interaction modes with the pivot, and many other things don't support snapping, and most certainly don't support matching transforms. Adding insult to injury, matching or resetting transforms in Maya is highly deficient out of the box, as it will often work on the whole hierarchy regardless of what you intended to do. Lastly, center mode worked seamlessly with all manipulation tools, you could switch to center mode and have child compensation on and snap/match to another object. This offers unequalled control over geometry handling in relation to its center. In Maya I've always found pivots superior to neutral pose for a long list of reasons, at least functionally, though the manipulation itself is weak (again, Maya is generally weak and fragmented in dealing with rotations). Maya's handling of reciprocating transforms between transform proper and geometry though leaves A LOT to be desired, and a page or two from XSI's book should be taken. On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 2:25 AM, Luc-Eric Rousseau <luceri...@gmail.com>wrote: > > > Is that always true in your scenarios? Moving center in Softimage is > like moving all the points of the geometry. (What brent calls > "transforming the geometry") > Knowing that it does that, wouldn't the simplest work-around for your > specific scenario in Maya be to select all points and move/rotate > them. > -- Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it and let them flee like the dogs they are!
