Show of hands, how many of you actually use Limits On or at least keep the various body part motions within the limit range of the body part if not using the Limits On option?

I'm just curious if people actually use this feature at all.

Yep, I use Limits On sometimes. Mostly when creating content. I would miss it if it wasn't there any more but not for boy parts. :blink:

I use limits. How could you use IK without limits? I've forced limits for a lot of parts as well.

In my case, it's the underwear answer:

It depends.

That's supposed to be BODY PART limits. Typos suck.  It also sucks that we can not edit our thread titles.

I'm of the mind that if a figure has limits assigned, those are - as far as the rigger is concerned - the ideal physical limits of the figure. In some cases, I see people working without limits, for example, rotating the forearm side to side instead of twisting the shoulder, which would be how the action worked in real life. So when I see things like that, I wonder if the feature is even worth having.

You can set a figure up and force limits, and hide the offending dial to make it a bit more difficult. I use limits a lot in rigging machines. If the limits are bypassed parts start to come apart.

teyon, they can edit it, if you ask the right one.  it threw me off a bit, I daresay :lol:

That's something I want to do. I think it's the better way to go and would eliminate the "this is badly rigged" complaints that usually pop up because people don't stick within the limits of a figure. I mean, sometimes it is just rigged badly but other times, a lot of the times, it's an issue of not using limits and not continuing the motion throught the related body parts.

I don't know if I use them or not. Probably not. What ever is the default. I do see the advantage of having them on, more realistic bends. I also see the advantage of having them off. Some times people do bend in ways that are not tipical. They usually get to spend the next several weeks in a cast but it happens. I've also seen some young kids bend in ways that would put your average adult into the hospital. And there is also the appeal of being able to do the imposible with poser.

I guess the best would be to have it on by default and let users turn it off as needed.

Quote - teyon, they can edit it, if you ask the right one.  it threw me off a bit, I daresay :lol:

I know...but we shouldn't have to ask.

Quote - That's supposed to be BODY PART limits. Typos suck.  It also sucks that we can not edit our thread titles.

I was only teasing. I guessed it was body parts but I like the title the way it is. At least it gets attention. :lol:

Quote - That's supposed to be BODY PART limits. Typos suck.  It also sucks that we can not edit our thread titles.

Ah, I was about to say that a big part of the charm of CGI is that the boy parts didn't have to have limits...

:) You guys and gals are silly. lol. 

Sometimes limits are useful, but more often, I find them extremely annoying.  Yes, you can turn edit them, but it's a hassle.  And newbies don't know how to do it.

I use limits a lot when animating.

What they are set to depends on what I am trying to animate, they always seem to be conditional.

I don't use them when setting up/modifying joints in a character so I can bend the joint as far as wireframe and type of joint setup will allow. If you can get the joint to look good past what they normally bend it will look fine with limits setup and on.

I clicked on this thread thinking it was going to be about an update to Ryan/Tyler's naughty bits.

Quote - I clicked on this thread thinking it was going to be about an update to Ryan/Tyler's naughty bits.

So did I! Aw.... I was hoping his foreskin problems were fixed! :(

I sometimes change the limits value, if i use limits. It is a feature and I just go with what works.

Yes, always. I never use a character without enabling the limits on them if they're off for some reason. In fact, I have it set as default on when I start up Poser.

I was a martial arts instructor for a number of years, I'm also traditional pencil and paper artist so I've studied joints and joint movement as part of my schooling and martial arts training. Knowing how far most people's joints can move and how they look at those limits just makes me squirm when I see poser renders using no limits and arms/legs/torsos are bent in ways that they just shouldn't be. Talk about joint pain, ouch, I actually feel the pain. So I never pose anything without limits set to on. (actually please don't talk about joint pain, I know it all too well)

I  think  they should be on by default. I wouldn't go so far as to try to make it difficult for people to bypass the default if they want to,. Having something like a visual cue - e.g. field turns red when going past the limits might be nice. I once saw someone complain that the limits must have been based on an old, infirm person, but I suppose that's a matter of opinion as to what they should be. If you're doing something like a machine as markschum mentions, then it's an easier decision. If we had really sophisticated figures with variable properties like weight and age etc, it would be nice to have dynamic limits that adjusted to fit those characteristics.

I wonder if we'll eventually see a technology where limits can be defined on a situational basis. For example, the ideal limits for a shldr swing when the arm is down stray from what looks realistic when a collar is up. It would be nice to be able to assign limits to the shldr that work only when the collar is up and to have them automatically widened to accomodate the natural swing of an arm that is down. This sort of tech could be useful for a lot of other part rotations as well.

I should mention again, this is me asking, not SM.  The engineers aren't into taking features away. As a content creator though, I was just curious wether forcing limits would be the better way to go, as it's been my experience both when I was in Tech Support and based on comments at trade shows, that people don't know about or don't use the Limits On feature.

I'm actually quite surprised by the number of people who have posted here saying they use it. That's kind of why I was asking because I had a feeling the impression I was getting may have been skewed. 

MY boy parts HAVE no limits!

I fixed the title.  But you might get fewer views.  ;)  

I used it initially, but found I often had to manually change limits which wasn't any fun.  I like the idea in theory, especially to prevent "impossible' motions such as wrist rotation.  What I don't like is when a part that should bend won't bend enough to achieve a desired pose.

I'll use limits sometimes when startin' a figure pose then switch 'em off fer fine tunin' later if I have to.

If I'm usin' someone else's poses, I almost always have limits on initially to save me the hassle of zeroin' "impossible moves" such as Side to Side on the forearm/ shin, or Twist on the wrist/ fingers. I'm not sure if I'm more amused or annoyed that so many ppl release poses apparently without actually looking at their own (or a friend's) bodies & askin' "Is this possible?"

o_O

I turn limits on frequently, especially when a pose I'm working on gets seriously out of whack. When that happens I'll turn on limits and that will do a "minor" reset.

I like the question, though. With a lot of software there are features that are never used in the real world, but new users don't know if they are useful or not, and the manual never says, "This is a pretty worthless feature, but we've left it in anyway."

Use it all the time ; it is part of personalising/adapting a figure.

First I morph the object file.
Then I adapt the rigging.
Then I set the limits for each joint.

And I click the "force limits" in their parameters palette.

My vote would thus be;
YES: very usefull.

While setting up IK, I was surprised to find that the "forced limits" cease to be forced when IK is turned on. (I didn't test this for every figure, btw.) When you turn on "use limits," they will work. Maybe there's a reason for this.

See now, that's information I did not know. I'll have to check with Larry on why that is - I'm sure there's a reason.