Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Umm. Because it doesn't make much sense? Seriously, any such transforms 
> are going to be "very" specific to the IK chain of the particular object 
> you are working with. There is no point in making an array called 
> "walk", which contains the needed transforms, instead of making it part 
> of the object, because logically it can't be applied to any "other" 
> objects.

Errr, well, have you used Hash Animation Master? As long as you name the 
bones the same there, you can apply the "walk" to anything you want.

However, you missed my point, which was that if the array is separate 
from the object, you can have multiple arrays and hence multiple sets of 
transformations that apply to the object at different times in the 
animation.  If the character walks a while, then runs a while, do you 
put the walk transformations or the run transformations in the object?
If the array can be indexed by the object itself, then there's no 
question in the code of the transformation being "off separate" 
somewhere that's hard to find.

-- 
   Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
     Remember the good old days, when we
     used to complain about cryptography
     being export-restricted?

Post a reply to this message