Quote - odf,

Quote - I think the current rigging with the hipHandle as the figure root and parent of the actual hip is very, very useful, and I'd rather drop the 'drop to floor' feature than that (no pun intended).

What is so wonderful about the hiphandle? Sure you can select it then use it to move the hip, but why not just select the hip directly. I must be missing something here. Please enlighten me.

Am I freaking Buddha or what? :tongue2:

I just find it very useful to have some extra degrees of freedom for the body's orientation that I can save in a pose. For example, I just made a crouching pose yesterday (see my gallery), which requires an x-rotate of the hip. Let's say I want to combine this with a twist of the torso for which I now need to rotate the hip vertically. The hip's y-axis is no longer vertical, so this can become quite tricking without the extra hip handle. Of course I could always rotate the body, but saving the body transforms in a pose is not usually a good idea.

Another neat feature of the hip handle is that it allows one to make use of inverse kinematic of the legs in a more intuitive way. Instead of having to find the hip and move it around, you just grab the figure above the head.

All that said, I sometimes wonder if I shouldn't just ditch all the handle actors, the toecaps and the brows and make the figure as simple as possible. I have a dark suspicion that there's a lot of complexity in there that hardly anyone will ever use, including myself.

-- I'm not mad at you, just Westphalian.