PDA

View Full Version : Maya Style Joints?



epyon1873
02-12-2013, 01:30 AM
Just found a option of Maya style Joints
What is the usage and different with the joint.

Try to ticks it on and off , cannot found the different.

Thanks

111422

bazsa73
02-12-2013, 02:46 AM
I guess it is for the fbx export.

Deep Purple
02-12-2013, 03:18 AM
If "Maya Style Joints" is ticked on the bone will be drawn into the direction of the parent, regardless of the "z-Axis" orientation.

Cheers,
David

erikals
02-12-2013, 06:01 AM
Hmm... :]

MSherak
02-17-2013, 09:46 AM
If "Maya Style Joints" is ticked on the bone will be drawn into the direction of the parent, regardless of the "z-Axis" orientation.

Cheers,
David

Which is FRIGGIN AWESOME!!!!

RebelHill
02-17-2013, 10:50 AM
Which is totally no different to the existing LW joints, and still backwards.

Ive tried, but I honestly cant see what these (so called) maya style joints do any different (other than still not being anything like maya's joints).

jeric_synergy
02-17-2013, 02:05 PM
:onlooker: :confused: Nothing in the dox?

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 02:16 AM
Which is totally no different to the existing LW joints, and still backwards.

Ive tried, but I honestly cant see what these (so called) maya style joints do any different (other than still not being anything like maya's joints).

As already said somewhere else, the Maya Joints option it's there to make LW Bones look like Maya Joints (Pivots in 3D space, with the visual connection defined by hierarchies), so we can have a better visual representation of the skeleton if the rig has been created in Maya and the bones are not oriented in a natural way.

Again, that's just visual, and was introduced to solve specific requests coming from Studios using Maya and LightWave in their pipeline (studios that prefer to use bones instead of LightWave Joints).

erikals
02-18-2013, 05:21 AM
an alternative name could be "Reversed Joints" ?

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 06:07 AM
an alternative name could be "Reversed Joints" ?

Why?

A Maya joint it's more similar to a Bone than to a LightWave Joint, which it's something very different.
A Maya joint it's just a Pivot (they have no Rest Length, only mesh vertexes assigned). The links that can be seen between joints in Maya are only a graphical representation of parenting.
If you ignore the rest length of a bone in LightWave, all you have it's a Pivot. And when you're using weights (one for each bone, as it happens in Maya), the Rest Length really has zero influence on the deformation.
The option works with the FBX importer, which assigns a different weight for each bone. What you're seeing will be exactly what you can see in Maya, since the bones are drawn as simple pivots, and you can see the hierarchical representation of parenting.
Again, it's a very specific option for studios using mixed pipelines, and it's really useful. ;)

Surrealist.
02-18-2013, 07:19 AM
+1 on the request then. :D

Anyway.... cool because it answers a thing I was just recently confused about. But hopefully if I have it right these two images will help anyone trying to understand it.

First of all it would have to be on FBX import - where I ran into it. If you are doing this with Bones from LightWave I can't imagine it would make a difference.

The reason is because a joint in Maya when you are exporting an FBX, basically behaves the same way - as Lino describes:

In Maya the joint is just a point in space. Unlike LightWave bones which are Z axis.

111671

And so when you import a rig, for it to look right - before this option - you'd have to choose "Joints", as I have here:

111672

I then switched one of the joints to a bone and you can see that it follows the orientation of the joint rather than the "local" bone Z direction it would be if it was a LightWave Bone.

If I have this right, it is an option for LightWave bones not Joints and only for use with FBX import.

Would this not also give you the option to use bone influence rather than 1oo percent weighing I wonder?

erikals
02-18-2013, 07:29 AM
If I have this right, it is an option for LightWave bones not Joints and only for use with FBX import.

yap, that's how i understood it too.

RebelHill
02-18-2013, 07:55 AM
Yes, its a draw option for bones, not joints, and is just a drawing, it changes nothing in terms of functionality...

My point was its still backwards in appearance, as if u select the last joint in a chain in maya the "bone" above it doesnt highlight (confusing)... also, beacuse under the hood these are still Zbones, the deformation differences u get by changing rest length, etc, still apply even though there's no longer any representation of that rest length (more confusing).

It would still be far better if LW joints were fixed properly so that the "deformer/bone" portion was linked parent>child rather than the other way round... then the LW joints would function any which way u cared to treat them... same as Zbones, same as maya joints... whatever. Then you'd have one bone type that functioned and drew in a normal intuitive fashion, and worked for all scenarios.

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 08:18 AM
Yes, its a draw option for bones, not joints, and is just a drawing, it changes nothing in terms of functionality...

Exactly.


My point was its still backwards in appearance, as if u select the last joint in a chain in maya the "bone" above it doesnt highlight (confusing)... also, beacuse under the hood these are still Zbones, the deformation differences u get by changing rest length, etc, still apply even though there's no longer any representation of that rest length (more confusing).

If you load an fbx with the Maya Joint Option on, you do that just because you want a more "natural" graphical representation of the hierarchy. And for sure if you do that, it's because you will not change anything in the rig (if we can call it like that, since we're really talking about keyframed bones with no controls).



It would still be far better if LW joints were fixed properly so that the "deformer/bone" portion was linked parent>child rather than the other way round... then the LW joints would function any which way u cared to treat them... same as Zbones, same as maya joints... whatever. Then you'd have one bone type that functioned and drew in a normal intuitive fashion, and worked for all scenarios.

It's time for LightWave to get some more standard animation tools. Standard Joints, Constraints, IK...everything. And/Or to introduce something really new, that can't be just a "variation" based on something that it's already there. That's what LightWave joints are, something build on-top of something that was already there (LightWave Bones).

RebelHill
02-18-2013, 09:47 AM
It's time for LightWave to get some more standard animation tools. Standard Joints, Constraints, IK...everything. And/Or to introduce something really new

Yeah... a lot of folks (including myself) have only been saying that for about 8 years now.

bazsa73
02-18-2013, 10:20 AM
like IK spline solvers!
plus smg new

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 10:35 AM
Yeah... a lot of folks (including myself) have only been saying that for about 8 years now.

I think anyone that has been doing some serious Character Animation in LightWave has been saying that.

jeric_synergy
02-18-2013, 10:45 AM
To halt some of the confusion, perhaps "Maya-look Joints" as a label would work better. --not great. Alternate verbiage?

To me, "Maya style" implies functionality, not just a display change.

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 10:47 AM
To halt some of the confusion, perhaps "Maya-look Joints" as a label would work better. --not great. Alternate verbiage?

To me, "Maya style" implies functionality, not just a display change.

That's an interesting proposal! Thanks!

jeric_synergy
02-18-2013, 10:50 AM
That's an interesting proposal! Thanks!
And label changes are easy. :)

RebelHill
02-18-2013, 10:53 AM
To halt some of the confusion, perhaps "Maya-look Joints" as a label would work better. --not great. Alternate verbiage?

To me, "Maya style" implies functionality, not just a display change.

Actually style means , character/appearance or form... NOT functionality. Look/style are more or less the same word in different jackets.

"Draw as joints" would probs be better (seeing as its only relevant to Zbones)... or even having the option greyed out when the bone type is joint would be helpful too.

Ryan Roye
02-18-2013, 10:58 AM
To me, "Maya style" implies functionality, not just a display change.

I agree with this.

jeric_synergy
02-18-2013, 11:03 AM
Actually style means ,
Should I have bolded "implies"? Or double underlined "me"?

Surrealist.
02-18-2013, 11:53 AM
I would keep Joints out of the label entirely. It has nothing to do with Joints.

Here is a list of suggestions:

Draw FBX Bones As LW Z Axis

Draw FBX Bones as Z Axis

FBX Import as Z Axis

Covert FBX to Z Axis

FBX to Z Bones

FBX as Z Bones

Correct FBX Draw

Correct FBX Bone Orientation

Correct FBX as Z Bone

FBX to Faux Z Bone

Display FBX Bones as Z Bones

FBX to Z Bone Switch

FBX Draw Z Bones

etc etc....

jeric_synergy
02-18-2013, 12:13 PM
"Display", "draw", or "look" is the key thing here: so as not to imply they've magically started to act like Maya Joints.

lino.grandi
02-18-2013, 01:48 PM
"Display", "draw", or "look" is the key thing here: so as not to imply they've magically started to act like Maya Joints.

A Maya Joint acts exactly as a LightWave bone with a Rest Length set to 100 um (the minimum). No difference at all. ;)

Surrealist.
02-18-2013, 06:07 PM
A Maya Joint acts exactly as a LightWave bone with a Rest Length set to 100 um (the minimum). No difference at all. ;)

As I understand it there is a huge difference.

They are not Z bones. You can never get a Maya Joint to point down a local Z axis. (that is unless constrained I gather) Maya joints edit almost exactly as LightWave Joints when you draw them. The "bone" draw in Maya is just about exactly as LightWave Joints in the sense that they are always the right length and you can always - until constrained - move a joint independently, just as you can with LightWave Joints. And not have it "detach" from the bone tip. You can not adjust the rest length of a Maya "bone" as it is just as a LightWave joint. Only a representation.

However when you import an FBX file and choose Bone, you are in another camp entirely. These are in fact bones. The rest length can be adjusted. They are pointing the wrong way. Because the originate as joints that do not go down the local Z.

The "Maya Style Joints" have nothing to do with Maya at all other than a correction for the LightWave Bone to "look" like it is correct. Beyond that I have not used it so I don't know if it changes anything else. But either way, it has no representation or similarity to Maya at all. Because we are only talking about using LightWave bones which normally look like Maya joints but that is where the comparison ends.

If anything it should say, FBX import: LightWave Style Bones.

Even if you never used that feature before - like me - and you were looking for why the bones were facing the wrong way, (like I was) a more apt labeled feature would be helpful.

MSherak
02-18-2013, 06:55 PM
Which is totally no different to the existing LW joints, and still backwards.

Ive tried, but I honestly cant see what these (so called) maya style joints do any different (other than still not being anything like maya's joints).

Lightwave and Maya work pretty close when Maya joints use Euler. Lightwave assigns the weights to the root of a zbone. Maya assigns the weights to the joint which is the root. The draw function between joints in Maya is visual. Now we can draw zbones in Lightwave a joints with and the draw visual in between. Now the main difference of the the actual function comes down to the fact that the root of Maya's system is quaterion based. So a point in space with a draw vector if place in a hierarchy, like their joints. This means that the joints have no rotation relation to each other unless contrained. Each can be independent even in a hierarchy. The vector can be assest in the rotation within a hierarchy. This can be very fast to calculate but also comes with some pains. Which the Maya team has done a great job of overcoming though you can still get in a pickle just like you can in Lightwave.

With that being said. I have gotten a Maya character rig over to Lightwave with FBX and they work the same along with looking the same between the packages. I can get animation back and forth due to FBX handling all the math needed to convert the inputs and outputs. Best thing is the weighting comes over perfect between both. (The game artist in me believes in a weight per bone) This was not a light character either since it was one of the game charcters for MLB-The Show. Course if FBX was not in place this would not happen between any 3D packages nowadays since they all have their own way of working.

Attached is a basic scene. Functionally no different in LW. To a Maya artist the non-lightwave looking one is correct, which in the end is the point.

lino.grandi
02-19-2013, 02:04 AM
As I understand it there is a huge difference.

They are not Z bones. You can never get a Maya Joint to point down a local Z axis. (that is unless constrained I gather) Maya joints edit almost exactly as LightWave Joints when you draw them. The "bone" draw in Maya is just about exactly as LightWave Joints in the sense that they are always the right length and you can always - until constrained - move a joint independently, just as you can with LightWave Joints. And not have it "detach" from the bone tip. You can not adjust the rest length of a Maya "bone" as it is just as a LightWave joint. Only a representation.

However when you import an FBX file and choose Bone, you are in another camp entirely. These are in fact bones. The rest length can be adjusted. They are pointing the wrong way. Because the originate as joints that do not go down the local Z.

The "Maya Style Joints" have nothing to do with Maya at all other than a correction for the LightWave Bone to "look" like it is correct. Beyond that I have not used it so I don't know if it changes anything else. But either way, it has no representation or similarity to Maya at all. Because we are only talking about using LightWave bones which normally look like Maya joints but that is where the comparison ends.

Take out the Rest Length from a Bone (and that is what you get when you set the Rest Length to the minimum), and you'll get a pivot in space that has a perfect spherical influence. Just as a Maya Joint (you can verify it activating the Limited Range option...set the Rest Length to the minimum and the Capsule Shaped influence will become a perfect sphere). You will get exactly what a Maya joint is.

The only difference between a Maya Joint and a LightWave Z-Bone it's the Rest Length. Not using it (which it's possible) leads a Z-Bone to act exactly as a Maya Joint (especially if you have one weight assigned to each joint/bone, as it happens in Maya AND in LightWave once you import an FBX file).




If anything it should say, FBX import: LightWave Style Bones.

Even if you never used that feature before - like me - and you were looking for why the bones were facing the wrong way, (like I was) a more apt labeled feature would be helpful.

The problem of the bones facing the wrong way, it's a minor one, since you can solve it easily setting the Rest Length to 1mm. The real one it's that we didn't have a proper representation of the hierarchy. The Maya Style Joints option solves this problem.

If you want a 1 to 1 correspondence of what you have in Maya and LightWave, using z-bones it's the only option at the moment.

jwiede
02-19-2013, 02:29 AM
"Draw as joints" would probs be better (seeing as its only relevant to Zbones)... or even having the option greyed out when the bone type is joint would be helpful too.
I agree with this. IMO, the problem isn't the "Maya-style" part, it's the "joint" part, which I read as implying joints are actually used. What's needed is phrasing that indicates what are used are bones, but represented in a fashion like Maya joints. "Draw bones as Maya joints" but less verbose (and I'm not sure the "Maya" reference really makes any difference once in that context).

Surrealist.
02-19-2013, 04:34 AM
Take out the Rest Length from a Bone (and that is what you get when you set the Rest Length to the minimum), and you'll get a pivot in space that has a perfect spherical influence. Just as a Maya Joint (you can verify it activating the Limited Range option...set the Rest Length to the minimum and the Capsule Shaped influence will become a perfect sphere). You will get exactly what a Maya joint is.

Yes. I understand this. It is a given. Bones are still oriented differently which is the only point being made there.



The only difference between a Maya Joint and a LightWave Z-Bone it's the Rest Length. Not using it (which it's possible) leads a Z-Bone to act exactly as a Maya Joint (especially if you have one weight assigned to each joint/bone, as it happens in Maya AND in LightWave once you import an FBX file).


Which has weights assigned already presumably.

If I am using weights which is what I assume we are talking about here, this is always the case with the settings I use. And to me bones have always had that function and rest length is not an issue. It can be anything at that point. You can still have one weight per bone. So you are kind of loosing me here.




The problem of the bones facing the wrong way, it's a minor one, since you can solve it easily setting the Rest Length to 1mm. The real one it's that we didn't have a proper representation of the hierarchy. The Maya Style Joints option solves this problem.

Which looses me further for 2 reasons. 1) why would I even care to set all of the rest lengths to 1mm for every bone in a rig I imported just to solve it looking wrong? Assuming I am using weights. and 2) If am not using weights then I do care. This is not a minor issue at all. So I am completely lost on this point. I thought that this is what was being solved.

Hierarchy I can understand only if I was planning on parenting other items to the rig. Otherwise I am king of lost again here.

If I had this wrong with my posted images to clarify on page one, that could have been pointed out simple enough. I am OK with it. But I am sorry if I don't follow any of this logic at all. Z bones point the wrong way. You can not use them to adjust Rest length if you wanted to. That was what I thought this was about.




If you want a 1 to 1 correspondence of what you have in Maya and LightWave, using z-bones it's the only option at the moment.

Which, sigh, I thought was exactly what we were talking about in the first place. And what this feature was supposed to make possible to do. Which by the way without this feature - as I understood it - was impossible.

I thought for a moment that I understood what this was all about. And now I am more confused. Sorry.

So anyways, good luck on everything, I think you are doing great work with the new rigging tools for LightWave and I hope it all fairs well into the future.

lino.grandi
02-19-2013, 04:56 AM
Yes. I understand this. It is a given. Bones are still oriented differently which is the only point being made there.

You can choose the joint orientation in Maya.




Which has weights assigned already presumably.

If I am using weights which is what I assume we are talking about here, this is always the case with the settings I use. And to me bones have always had that function and rest length is not an issue. It can be anything at that point. You can still have one weight per bone. So you are kind of loosing me here.

Again, the option it's specific for users/studios using a Maya2LightWave pipeline. That means one defined weight for each bone. And the animation already done...with deformation in LightWave reporting exactly what happens in Maya as well. Solved the visual problem, you have one joint in Maya= one Bone in LightWave, both for functionality and visualization.




Which looses me further for 2 reasons. 1) why would I even care to set all of the rest lengths to 1mm for every bone in a rig I imported just to solve it looking wrong? Assuming I am using weights. and 2) If am not using weights then I do care. This is not a minor issue at all. So I am completely lost on this point. I thought that this is what was being solved.

1) You don't really care about setting the rest to 1mm, mine was just an example....again, if your pipeline is to import an animation from Maya to LW using FBX, you can use the Maya Joint option to make it look better. It's just that.
2) If you're not using weights you're doing something different here. You're importing Motions only....and that's a whole different topic/situation.




Hierarchy I can understand only if I was planning on parenting other items to the rig. Otherwise I am king of lost again here.
If I had this wrong with my posted images to clarify on page one, that could have been pointed out simple enough. I am OK with it. But I am sorry if I don't follow any of this logic at all. Z bones point the wrong way. You can not use them to adjust Rest length if you wanted to. That was what I thought this was about.

Your images/samples are ok, and I agree with what you say there.




Which, sigh, I thought was exactly what we were talking about in the first place. And what this feature was supposed to make possible to do. Which by the way without this feature - as I understood it - was impossible.

I thought for a moment that I understood what this was all about. And now I am more confused. Sorry.

No, you're not confused at all. The post you made showing the images proves it. I think it's me, with the following posts...I've pushed it further with the comparison between a Maya joint and a LightWave bone. ;)



So anyways, good luck on everything, I think you are doing great work with the new rigging tools for LightWave and I hope it all fairs well into the future.

Thank you so much!

Surrealist.
02-19-2013, 06:24 AM
OK, You're welcome.

Interesting discussion. I am sure I'll get on the same page at some point. Leave it at that.

Thanks for taking the time to clarify. :)

jeric_synergy
02-19-2013, 10:35 AM
When you heavy hitters get confused on something like this, you can rest assured that us light-weights are totally baffled.

It sounds like A)this only affects LW+MAYA pipelines using B) FBX translation.

As such, I'm going to ignore it (until I can't) and just [placeholder for standard documentation/article/UI plea].

lino.grandi
02-19-2013, 12:13 PM
When you heavy hitters get confused on something like this, you can rest assured that us light-weights are totally baffled.

It sounds like A)this only affects LW+MAYA pipelines using B) FBX translation.

As such, I'm going to ignore it (until I can't) and just [placeholder for standard documentation/article/UI plea].

Agreed. We need to document it.