small annoying things

[Acrobat]

small annoying things:






After work a bit upon a geometry gizmo stretch in strange way and becoming unusable in Local mode (only scale can be used but only if you scale all three dimension (gizmo central box)

It is me or is a bug?

Another question, when downloaded 2014 trial version, I opened some test scenes, the last one was a facerobot scene. Now every time I open softimage or load a scene the layout is not the default but the facerobot one and I must cage it manually (view>layout>default) ... how can I cage and keep the default layout? I tried saving with the right layout but everytime I open again softimage facerobot layout is here...

[mihaiNL]

For question 1, it says in the Facerobot manual:

Tip If you close Softimage with Face Robot mode enabled, this mode is automatically enabled the next time you open the Softimage. Make sure to disable Face Robot mode before exiting Softimage if it's not the typical mode you want to use. See below for more information.

So just uncheck "Enable Facerobot" from its menu at the top, then close and reopen SI.

For question 2, I think this is normal if you try to work with polygons in Local mode when the vertices of a polygon are not in the same plane and stretched. The gizmo can't really show you what is the local Y axis for example in this case and it's best to switch to Object mode. From your screenshots above it looks like you're trying to scale and move those pieces individually so the best way would be to press Alt and then select a point/edge which will temporarily move the gizmo to that point or edge, switch to Object mode and move/scale/rotate from that temp gizmo. I find this kind of workflow stuff really well thought out and efficient in SI. When you press Alt again now, you can see a little arrow below the temp gizmo which has two options: Lock and Reset - to lock that gizmo there even when changing your selection, or deselecting/selecting again, or Reset it - practical

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

Your scale and transform gizmos are distorted, because your object has a non uniform scaling. Go to transform > freeze scaling and it will be allright.

Your rotation mode is most likely set to "add". Switch to local or view.

[Acrobat]

Hi, thanks for the tips, now the facerobot issue is fixed

About gizmo, Lord Futzi your suggest resolve the problem, but to me is not perfect. Attached picture of the some item into modo (I have too many trial into my PC... a mess)
This is after I freeze all transform:


To me appear not correct, this is, IMO, the correct gizmo position:




Edit: no, Lord Futzi, the rotation gizmo is not in ADD mode but in local Mode.

[Lord Futzi Voldemort]

If you use Freez All Transform, rotation will be freezed as well, aligning the local axis to the world axis. That's why you use freeze scaling only in this case if you want to retain your objects rotation.

[Acrobat]

Sorry, don't understood...

If I don't freeze trasformation I have wrong local gizmo (stretched), but if I freeze it (freeze rotation, transform and scale), all gizmo appear better (no more stretched) but are not precise as I see in modo viewport. I showed only rotation gizmo after freezing, but all the gizmo don't work well as expected in local mode.

edit: another example, some gemometry some edge loop selected
scale gizmo after freezing all transform:


scale gizmo in modo:



The modo one look correctly.

[McNistor]

This is obviously a 'rtfm' matter, but not to discourage you I will try to assist you a little by pointing to the right chapters.

You need to understand how transform modes work.
I'm referring to "Global", "Local", "Add" (for rotation), etc.

These modes are for objects as well as their sub-object elements (points, lines, polys).

And here's a tip from me:
never screw with an object scale! If you want to make it bigger/smaller/longer/etc. enter in point mode and scale it using all selected points. Rotating and translating in object mode is fine but scaling is not recommended, at least not until you're very knowledgeable about these things.

Oh one more thing. From your screen-shots I suspect a problem that has to do with your metal approach:
judging from the fact that you've changed the colors in XSI to match those of Modo I think you're trying to make it also work like Modo.
Don't do this! I've suffered the same affliction when I've transitioned from Max - I've tried to make XSI work like Max which is obviously not possible. Embrace the new way of doing things!

[McNistor]

Regarding your screenshot.

Try entering in "local" mode and see if that helps.
If not, use the tweek tool by pressing 'm'. Middle click on the edge that you want your gizmo to align to.

[Acrobat]

Hi McNistor, thanks a lot for the time you dedicated to me

No, I don't know at all modo, only downloaded the trial, but don't know it.

About viewport colours, is only a test I did with layout and colours for liberate myself by facerobot gui issue I described in my first post, the similarity with modo viewport is totally involuntary.

Seems I was not clear with my previous post. I'm in LOCAL mode, both in modo and in softimage. In softimage after a bit of work local mode becoming wrong, like I explained. Lord Futzi tip (freeze all transforms) help a lot, the gizmo are no more stretched but the gizmo position, in local mode, continue to appear wrong. The some geometry and the some edges loop selected in modo show a gizmo correct positioned, in softimage no.

The Move component tool tips is great! So in this way it automatically enter in REF mode, really handy. Indeed REF mode was the only solution for this problem, but right mouse click in REF button and then select edge or polygons is very weird workflow... This don't resolve the LOCAL mode error (is a bug?) but is very nice addition (Move component toll is great!)

Seems I'm the only one with LOCAL mode problem.

Another issue: symmetry mode in softimage is not so useful, but I don't extrude/delete/add anything is useful. Strangely, sometime work, sometime no, and sometime symmetry is lost during the modelling process. There is a reason for this?

[McNistor]

I don't know how does XSI evaluate the local mode (I'm referring to the math behind), I speculate its some kind of averaging, so if you have a selection of edges that go into all directions the result expressed in the gizmo alignment won't be very predictable. Someone with more knowledge about "under the hood" might confirm or infirm this.
However, this "M tool" works then don't remain fixated on the "local" mode. Use whatever works, forget about the naming.

Regarding the symmetry I do this:
-clone your object
-scale it -1 in X (this time is OK to scale it in object mode)
-work on your object (original one)
-when finished delete/hide the clone and symmetrize all polys of the object.

[Acrobat]

I don't know how does XSI evaluate the local mode (I'm referring to the math behind), I speculate its some kind of averaging, so if you have a selection of edges that go into all directions the result expressed in the gizmo alignment won't be very predictable. Someone with more knowledge about "under the hood" might confirm or infirm this.
However, this "M tool" works then don't remain fixated on the "local" mode. Use whatever works, forget about the naming.

Regarding the symmetry I do this:
-clone your object
-scale it -1 in X (this time is OK to scale it in object mode)
-work on your object (original one)
-when finished delete/hide the clone and symmetrize all polys of the object.

Another great tip, thanks again

[McNistor]

You're welcome.
Since we're here - sharing tips - don't forget to use the interactive pivot when modeling (pressing Alt key and snapping the pivot around). I use all the time, especially when modeling non-organic objects.

[Chris_TC]

Another issue: symmetry mode in softimage is not so useful, but I don't extrude/delete/add anything is useful. Strangely, sometime work, sometime no, and sometime symmetry is lost during the modelling process. There is a reason for this?

This actually is a small annoying thing. I usually just model half the object and symmetrize when I'm done.
But I don't think there's a technical reason why we're not able to force evaluation of certain operators after others? For instance, build an ICE tree that symmetrizes and have all other modeling operators be added BELOW the tree. I mean we have six history stacks, why can't we use them in cases like this?

[iamVFX]

I mean we have six history stacks, why can't we use them in cases like this?

Because I have the feeling that Guillaume wrapped standard topological commands into ice nodes. If you notice most of the standard topo operators can't go above the modelling stack as well. It's like snowball effect - ones softimage failed at something before, there is no going back. The new developers will develop technology piled on top of the old architecture until it fall (High Quality viewport as an example)

[luceric]

yikes, way to be super-negative.
the modeling regions, indicated by the modeling market on the history stack, is just that: the place up to where topo operations can be done. the animation and simulation regions must be at a place where it is stable topologially. It's just like ordering a recipe, an order must be given to things. the fact you cannot "pin" operators at the top of the modeling region is a missing workflow, it isn't a an architectural flaw. the architecture supports that, as evidence with all the markers.

[origin]

So basically we are missing some kind of post-modelling stack, where u could pin/rearrange ops.