Paul Francis opened this issue on Sep 06, 2007 · 3 posts
Paul Francis posted Thu, 06 September 2007 at 3:18 AM
No, not a matching range of handbags and accessories.....
My Poser 7 seems to always use relative co-ordinates for each object/figure. Is there any way to force it to use absolute co-ordinates so the rotation axes remain constant?
My
self-build system - Vista 64 on a Kingston 240GB SSD,
Asus P5Q
Pro MB, Quad
6600 CPU, 8 Gb Geil Black Dragon Ram, CoolerMaster HAF932 full
tower chassis, EVGA Geforce GTX 750Ti Superclocked 2 Gb,
Coolermaster V8 CPU aircooler, Enermax 600W Modular PSU, 240Gb SSD,
2Tb HDD storage, 28" LCD monitor, and more red LEDs than a grown
man really
needs.....I built it in 2008 and can't afford a new one,
yet.....!
My
Software - Poser Pro 2012, Photoshop, Bryce 6 and
Borderlands......"Catch a
r--i---d-----e-----!"
kuroyume0161 posted Thu, 06 September 2007 at 8:45 AM
In most 3D apps, coordinate systems are relative to the parent. If there is no parent, then they are global (absolute). For figure body parts, it would make no sense to use global coordinates as you are rotating about the parent system (always!). Global rotations would be meaningless in this case, if not destructive, to the process as you would be rotating about the world origin and not the parent system. Nonetheless, in C4D for instance, you can work with either system.
For parented figures/props, the only recourse in Poser is to unparent to the Universe, do your transforms in that system, and then reparent. It must also be realized that the default local coordinate system is affected by the object's origin and orientation. If a prop has a non-zero orientation, its system will still not coincide with the world system.
C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the
foot. C++ makes it harder, but when you do, you blow your whole leg
off.
-- Bjarne
Stroustrup
Contact Me | Kuroyume's DevelopmentZone
ockham posted Thu, 06 September 2007 at 5:28 PM
As Kuroyume says, there's no good reason to have absolute rotation on
a 'realistic' figure. The limits on real bones and muscles are always relative to
the nearest connected part of the body.
I can imagine a couple of special cases where you might need to sense and
control each angle in absolute terms: maybe a planetary system, or
a robot arm that moves things within its own small 'world' while the whole
'world' is riding on a larger conveyor belt.
Is that the type of setup you're considering?