[Bf-committers] Component Group Proposal

Thu Jul 8 11:56:15 CEST 2010

I agree with this.  But I'd also like to point out that in complex
rigging the rigger often also wants to make distinctions that are not
inherent in the software, as well as associate things that are not
inherent in the software.  I wouldn't want to be stuck with one set of
vertex groups that are only for bones, and another that's only for
particle emission, and another that's only for something else, etc.  I
may want to make a vertex group serve a dual purpose for a bone weight
and something else, for example.  Or I might want two armature deform
modifiers, but operating with different weighting.  Or who knows what.
 Rigging is a crazy thing.

So if we head in this sort of direction, I would rather have a system
that lets me organize vertex groups myself (perhaps with some sane
defaults) than a system that enforces upon me distinctions and
similarities that may not fit how I've constructed a rig.  Maybe
something like vertex group groups.  Ha ha. ;-)

--Nathan

On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 9:45 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com
<zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
> That proves my point, there is a need for a distinction, and its not that
> simple. You would need to also name all your bones starting with RIG because
> vgroups are linked to bones by the names
>
> Daniel Salazar
> www.3developer.com
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Mike Belanger
> <mikejamesbelanger at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> In current ( 2.49b) to make a distinction between modifier and rigging vert
>> groups, I just prefix names with RIG or VERT.  Does this help?
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com <
>> zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Also I want to mention this would help on the tasks of deleting all
>> vgroups
>> > used on an armature without deleting the ones used on hair or similar
>> > stuff.
>> > Currently I use a simple py script with an exclusion list for this
>> > repetitive task. Would be nice if we could do this kind of operations for
>> > the relevant set only
>> >
>> > Daniel Salazar
>> > www.3developer.com
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 12:58 PM, Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com <
>> > zanqdo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Yah I mentioned this is a visual separation I'm proposing
>> > > and completely optional. A group belonging to one set or another
>> woudn't
>> > > have any effect on the group's usage all over blender.
>> > >
>> > > Daniel Salazar
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 8:49 AM, Brandon Phoenix <ktbluear at yahoo.com
>> > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hey Daniel,
>> > >> Just to clarify: "Maybe you can expand this concept to include Group
>> > >> Sets? This would be bags of data groups that could
>> > >> classifyvertes/edges/groups for their usage". Here you're essentially
>> > >> suggesting groups of groups? So that all of the vert groups used in
>> > rigging
>> > >> are kept separate from, say, the groups used to emit hair etc.?
>> > >> I'm not sure I agree with this though: "example the set of vertex
>> > >> groups that an specific armature modifier uses should not be visually
>> > >> mixed with the ones that are just used to feed another modifier". I
>> can
>> > >> think of cases that it may be beneficial to use the same edge group
>> for
>> > >> multiple things. For example, it is often beneficial to seam UVs along
>> > hard
>> > >> normal edges, so the sharp marked edge group could just be passed into
>> > the
>> > >> UV set, if that makes sense. Perhaps if it was at the user's
>> discretion
>> > to
>> > >> separate the group sets. I'll need to speak to matt_e about a UI
>> > >> implementation of this, because I'm not sure I've seen something like
>> it
>> > >> (outside of the outliner). I like the idea though, I'll see what I can
>> > draw
>> > >> up.
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> -Brandon Phoenix
>> > >> (I realized in my initial e-mail, I signed my name "Brandon Phoenix?".
>> > >> Oops.)
>> > >> -----------------------------------------------------------Date: Sun,
>> 20
>> > >> Jun 2010 21:11:04 -0600
>> > >> From: "Daniel Salazar - 3Developer.com" <zanqdo at gmail.com>
>> > >> Subject: Re: [Bf-committers] Component Group Proposal
>> > >> To: bf-blender developers <bf-committers at blender.org>
>> > >> Message-ID:
>> > >>     <AANLkTilmAVQruRz6nq-M4G2Os-N4hWy58BdUrxSk6qKC at mail.gmail.com>
>> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> > >>
>> > >> This is something that has been a real need since the introduction of
>> > >> modifiers. Maybe you can expand this concept to include Group Sets?
>> > >> This would be bags of data groups that could classify
>> > >> vertes/edges/groups for their usage, example the set of vertex groups
>> > >> that an specific armature modifier uses should not be visually mixed
>> > >> with the ones that are just used to feed another modifier
>> > >>
>> > >> cheers
>> > >>
>> > >> Daniel Salazar
>> > >> www.3developer.com
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> On Sun, Jun 20, 2010 at 9:05 PM, Brandon Phoenix <ktbluear at yahoo.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >> > This proposal is aimed at expanding the functionality of vertex
>> groups
>> > >> and unifying the UI by adding both vertex and face grouping. This may
>> be
>> > a
>> > >> bit late for the 2.6 release, but should probably be considered for
>> the
>> > >> future. I would like to solicit as much discussion on the topic as
>> > possible.
>> > >> The document is here:
>> > >> >
>> > >> > http://dim.blenderge.com/Documents/componentGroupProposal.pdf
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Thank you,
>> > >> >
>> > >> > -Brandon Phoenix
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > _______________________________________________
>> > >> > Bf-committers mailing list
>> > >> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>> > >> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> _______________________________________________
>> > >> Bf-committers mailing list
>> > >> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> > >> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Bf-committers mailing list
>> > Bf-committers at blender.org
>> > http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> www.watchmike.ca
>> _______________________________________________
>> Bf-committers mailing list
>> Bf-committers at blender.org
>> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-committers mailing list
> Bf-committers at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
>