PDA

View Full Version : What to take care of before start to model a puppet for rigging?



madno
03-04-2012, 02:50 AM
I want to try to model a figure like those wooden puppets with spheres as joints. It need to be rigged later on.

Do you know a tutorial about what to take care of before start to model?

I think about questions like:
- have the body parts to be individual objects or is it better to make them one geometry?
- into what direction should the shapes face (x or z)?
- should the feet be on the ground y axis or should it be the hip or the middle point of the figure?

and for sure there are much more issues I just do not know about.

Any tips are much appreciated.

RebelHill
03-04-2012, 04:34 AM
makes no difference... to all your questions.

With stuff that doesnt "deform" some folks like to break the pieces up, but its reli just as easy to keep it all in one layer and use weights (which is how I tend to go). Also, making the Y=0 the ground, and having entire character above it is intuitive, and so is often favoured.

IMI
03-04-2012, 04:43 AM
I want to try to model a figure like those wooden puppets with spheres as joints. It need to be rigged later on.


I think about questions like:
- have the body parts to be individual objects or is it better to make them one geometry?
<snip>


What Rebel Hill said above.

Although I left in your part about individual objects or one geometry, because in the case of your mannequin style figure I think you would be far better off parenting the objects and resetting the rotation pivot points (where necessary), as opposed to using one mesh and using bones.

So for example, the hand would be a child of the wrist joint sphere, (which would be a child of the forearm) and both would be separate objects, the wrist a child of the forearm, which would be a child of the elbow sphere-joint, and so on, where each part would be separate. I would personally use the hip as the parent of every part, and definitely have the figure's feet firmly planted at Y=0.

And although it might be time consuming to set up a hierarchical robot-like child/parent rig, it would be far easier to do than rigging it with bones, you wouldn't need any weight maps or "hold bones", and you can still use strategically-placed control objects like you would with a bone/joint rig instead of having to pose and animate the objects themselves.

madno
03-04-2012, 07:22 AM
Thanks RebelHill and IMI,

I was vague in my initial post. I like to try out the bones concept. I tried parenting some time ago (took me ages to make that scene). But I noticed that I have to rotate, move each joint one after the other (which also took ages to get the pose I wanted). In some examples here in the forum I saw figures that have some kind of control geometry, which is used to e.g. drag the hand and the arm follows automatically. If I got it right it is called Inverse Kinematik. Before starting from scratch I wanted to check how the model has to be made to work with this.

Well, just noticed the signature of RebelHill. Those links seem to be the answer to my questions.

:)

IMI
03-04-2012, 04:05 PM
Well I was just giving my opinion on it anyway. In the end, it's best to simply do what works out best for you.
I wouldn't use bones and IK for this kind of figure simply because of all the weight maps I'd have to make, but that's just me. If I were going to be using the model for a whole lot of complex animation I would probably use bones and IK, but for simpler posing, no.
Cool picture, BTW. :)

madno
03-05-2012, 12:54 AM
I bought the tut videos from RH and had a first very quick look this morning. Seems to be really complex stuff ;-) It might really be more easy to use parenting.
But hey, I need to learn it anyway (like everthing I am touching in LW these days). If my real job would just leave me more time ;-)
By the way the image was for an advert for our softproof solution. The slogen was something like "the nice thing about softproof: you don't need to refill ink"

RebelHill
03-05-2012, 05:06 AM
Seems to be really complex stuff ;-) It might really be more easy to use parenting.

Well...

The complex stuff is reli understanding LWs "laws of motion" (if u will). How constraints work, the rotation order used, the orientation of a given item, and how that works with a certain controller, etc, etc. And thats universal, so works the same on bones, nulls, cameras... everything.

So from that aspect... you wont find parenting parts together any easier... its the same.

But honestly... I much prefer the bones route, for this simple reason... Its just easier organisationally and workflow wise.

Once you get in, and go through the skeletal layout parts of the training, u'll see me using different tools on the bones like joint and tip move, to tweak their layout, and things like twist, and record pivot to set their base orientations... etc.

Now try doing it with just items by moving and rotating their pivot points... its much more time consuming, due to not having the same kind of tools to use, and being far more prone to error.

Trust me... bones is the quicker, and easier option everytime... And hey, it stops you from having to reinvent the wheel, as it winds up mattering not whether your character is like this, a "block man" or a smooth, deforming character skin, you can use the same approach, in the same way, and that's good for the long run.