Motion Tools

[gustavoeb]

Motion Tools is a set of ICE Compounds and Python Scripts that aims at aiding the Motion Graphics workflow inside Softimage.
This was previously posted in the community project thread, but since I'm making an Package Addon with some scripts and such I thought it needed a place here.

v0.2 Highlights:
All features found in moGraph cloners are present here (plus some more)
Better workflow through menus


For a better understanding of what the tool is and how it works, please visit the old video: https://vimeo.com/32825206

Full Release Notes:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39280733/Motion ... eNotes.txt

Addon:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/39280733/Motion ... s.xsiaddon
(note that you might have to restart the software, after install, for things to work properfly)

If you get to use it, please, send a postcard and report some bugs

Cheers

[Hirazi Blue]

Your link to the "Full Release Notes" point to the same download address as the one for the addon...
;)

[gustavoeb]

fixed, thanks

[SreckoM]

Thanks for sharing this!

[druitre]

Gustavo, the video looks great, thanks!

But: I'm not seeing those menu-entries you've got in ICE > particles > create. I see the addon installed correctly in the pluginmanager, and I also see the compounds in my ICE preset manager. Is there some other stuff that needs to be installed in order to have it work correctly?

(2012 SAP)

thanks, Jasper

[gustavoeb]

Hi Jasper, thanks for download and reporting problems.

I had this happend to me also... In my case it was related to the Python installation, it so happends that when you uninstall one old version of Softimage, Python vanishes from the remaining verions also. Just check the available scripting languages in your installation (see attached image). If Python is not then run "runonce.bat" (for more info http://xsisupport.wordpress.com/2010/06 ... tall-2011/).

Hope this helps

[druitre]

Hi Gustavo,
thanks, that was it - must've uninstalled older version recently.

Testing now, a few questions:

I notice that although 'create Instance Array on geom' works, whenever I try 'create Instance Array' I get this error message:

Code: Select all

'   File "<Script Block 2>", line 42, in ICEFlow_CreateInstanceArray
'     if oTmp == "Linear": ICEFlow_CreateInstanceArray_Execute(0)
'   File "<Script Block 2>", line 93, in ICEFlow_CreateInstanceArray_Execute
'     MTools_ApplyInstancer(oPC, oObj, type, oGeo)
' UnboundLocalError: local variable 'oPC' referenced before assignment
'  - [line 92 in G:\Workgroup\Addons\MotionTools\Application\Plugins\mTools_ICEFlow_Plugin.py]

In 'Array on geom', going to voxels mode, it's easy to pull the resolution slider down to '0' where SI will hang/freeze for some minutes, then come back but without voxels working. After a few times going back and forth between modes, voxels come back. Possible to prevent the slider from going to zero?

Is it also maybe an idea to have 'voxels' mode automatically switch to 'shape' because it seems it doesn't work with 'instance shape'?

In the particles>create menu, is it possible to have a divider/header 'MotionTools', thinking ahead for when there will be tens of menu items added by various plugins and it becomes hard to discern what is what.

thanks, Jasper

[gustavoeb]

Hey Jasper,

Ill take a look on what is producing those errors... I already have an idea, but it should not be hard to get rid of this.

On the resolution thing, it is possible to prevent it from evaluating 0 easily. But I was thinking it might be even best to just inver the behaviour of this, so the resolution number grows we have more instances. I implemented it as is right now to make it work like Lagoas resolution, but giving it more thought I guess the other way around might be more intuitive, and prevent freezing at the same time. What do you think?

Voxels do work with instanced shapes here, is it not working for you for some reason?

I'd love to create a Motion Tools header, my Python/SDK skills are still limited, as they grow, I hope to be able to achieve this...

Again, thank you very much for taking the time and testing this...

[druitre]

Hi Gustavo,

voxels do work now with instanced shapes, don't know why they didn't yesterday. Create Instance Array still gives the same error.

Inverting the resolution behavior sounds like a good idea, it solves the problem in an elegant way. Although I don't have intuitive problems with the way it is now.

On the matter of intuition: I think the picking order is counterintuitive, I keep on expecting that I first pick the object that I want to be instanced and then the object that I want it to be instanced on. It's more in line with 'instance array on geom' too; first 'instance', then 'array on geom'. Or is my thinking twisted?

Is it possible to include a 'hide instance master' button in the compound? Going through the object's visibility options, making a local copy and ticking the box there on and off if you want to switch is tiresome and confusing if you're dealing with multiple instance masters.

'Ramdones' parameter is randomness? Is it applying a random seed to how to pick items from a group? Is it possible to add a string input box, so that you can choose the items with more control (as in the scatter compounds, '0,1,1' gives twice as many items 1 to 0)

And a randomize slider for 'scale' too?

(btw, I think/ am quite sure I'd be able to add those last two myself in ICE, but I think these are some basic features to make the compound more useful.)

Thanks, Jasper

[gustavoeb]

It's more in line with 'instance array on geom' too; first 'instance', then 'array on geom'

You have a point

Is it possible to include a 'hide instance master' button in the compound?

At the moment buttons are not possible in ICE PPGs, on the other hand a less intuitive checkerbox can be done... Good suggestion

Is it possible to add a string input box, so that you can choose the items with more control (as in the scatter compounds, '0,1,1' gives twice as many items 1 to 0)

Another good one for the todo list

And a randomize slider for 'scale' too?

This can be already achieve through the modifier Randomize, it also randomizes rotations, position and colors with intuitive controls...

[gustavoeb]

So I am trying some new stuff here. I see many "user friendly" software use stacks instead of Nodes. This is possible in this case, and you would still be able to go in and change individual operations inside ICE... Here are some pros and cons and I got a little question for users at the end. Oh and I also posted pictures of both workflows...

Stacks
The Ups.

• Just double click an operator directly from the explorer to inspect it
  Reordering of operations through the stack is easier
  You can always go in ICETree mode and customize it yourself

The Downs:

• No multiple Roots (for having different point generation and modification inside the same object)
  User might have a simplified vision of things and miss oportunity of greater customization

ICETree
The Ups

• You are always working inside the place where you can customize the effect the most
  Separate multiple points generation and modification with a Root node
  It is really the default way to work with point clouds in SI this days

The Downs:

• Reordering is not that great

So my question is:
Do you see yourself more as an artsy or techy guy?
Would you rather interect with Motion Graphic tools inside Softimage through regular operators or ICETrees? (I've posted a pic of both options)

Ps: Im leaning towards the stack approach

[EricTRocks]

I'm on the techy side myself. One thing I find problematic with the stack based approach is the shear number of operators you'll end up with and won't be able to remember what part of what ICE Tree you're after. Having 1 ICE Tree with group/comments to dictate each area would be better in my opinion.

[schyzomaniac]

+1 for staying inside one ICE tree for as much as possible. Reordering might not be as simple as drag n' drop, but still simple enough to justify the benefits of being inside the tree. I can easily bring in other ICE nodes and play/test things out.

cheers,
Daniel

[bottleofram]

Artsy. Would still prefer nodes, but not sure which of those two solutions would be better, tbh.

Whether we like it or not, ICE Tree is not the fastest way to setup the stuff around. For example, i can easely see a user not very familiar with ICE (or softimage even) giving it a try and going
"Right! So i just get this node, and this one..."
"And there are bunch of those, i dont know what they do."
"I'll connect this..."
"No, thats not going in there."
"Ill just connect this than..."
"Why the hell is it red now? Whats going on?"
"..."
"What am i even doing?
"..."
"Someone... Please help!"

Compare that with a "press button, acquire results" approach and you're at the root of all that was ever wrong with ICE from an artist point of view.

Well, im of no help at all, im afraid...

[EricTRocks]

Artsy. Would still prefer nodes, but not sure which of those two solutions would be better, tbh.

Whether we like it or not, ICE Tree is not the fastest way to setup the stuff around. For example, i can easely see a user not very familiar with ICE (or softimage even) giving it a try and going
"Right! So i just get this node, and this one..."
"And there are bunch of those, i dont know what they do."
"I'll connect this..."
"No, thats not going in there."
"Ill just connect this than..."
"Why the hell is it red now? Whats going on?"
"..."
"What am i even doing?
"..."
"Someone... Please help!"

Compare that with a "press button, acquire results" approach and you're at the root of all that was ever wrong with ICE from an artist point of view.

Well, im of no help at all, im afraid...

They shouldn't be using ICE then.

[bottleofram]

They shouldn't be using ICE then.

True, true... Than again, you are possibly writing off a lot of extremely gifted people, Eric. After all, motion graphics are not about the way you get to the effect, but about the end result itself.

Just playing devils advocate, i guess.