<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<pre wrap=""><div class="moz-txt-sig">B.J.Tolputt wrote:
Claudio "malefico" Andaur wrote:
</div></pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Well, currently if you have other modifiers than an armature (let's
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>say a lattice), there are times that you need to set a 0.001 value for
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>the global armature, for just the mesh not to be left behind, if you
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>set it to zero, then no matter how high the weight is for the lattice,
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>it will be left behind. So, there ARE cases when you want this kind of
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>light weight in a vertex group.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this an example of where 0.001 is
actually 1.0 in terms of applied weight?
</pre>
----------------------------<br>
No, it's not the case because there are also the vertexgroups for
lattices influences.<br>
----------------------------<br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>Anyway, my personal opinion is that yeah, if you have a way to make
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>skinning faster, go ahead ! however, do you really think so ? have
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>you tried aaaalll the current features ? (I'm not saying you haven't,
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>it's a QUESTION) we just need to be sure to have a nice design that
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>considers all real cases. And don't feel offended in any way this is
<span class="moz-txt-citetags">> </span>not a personal thing.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->Well it is hard to say I have tried AAALLLLL the current features as the
only definitive documentation on ALL features is the code (and I'm not
going to delve into it just to find them!!!). On the other hand, I have
tried ALOT of the features, and none of them give me the ability to see
& paint "as it is applied to deformation".
</pre>
-------------------------------<br>
I agree, this wasn't intended particularly for you, it was just a
general explanation of my previous posture to let you and others
understand my first "conservative" reaction :)<br>
-------------------------------<br>
<br>
<pre>I do not think the application should expect ALL artists to completely disregard what they </pre>
<pre>see because it makes things easier for SOME of them. Adding the two </pre>
<pre>(toggle-enabled) functions of SEEING the weight as applied and PAINTING </pre>
<pre>the weights to applied values gives users the flexibility of trusting </pre>
<pre>their eyes while working and then allowing them to use the "standard" </pre>
<pre>method for tweaking if they so desire.</pre>
<pre>
</pre>
------------------------------------<br>
Now I believe you didn't read my previous answer. I totally agreed with
this already. I also suggested other changes.<br>
<br>
For the record, your assumption the current behavior makes things
easier for ANY user, is totally incorrect. The fact we or SOME as you
said, use Blender for skinning with all current limitations and don't
apparently complain about it, do not convert us automatically in big
fans of the current system. This also doesn't mean I'm going to embrace
anything apparently better unless there is proof of such changes to be
really better.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
<br>
malefico.
</body>
</html>