BretBays

I wouldn't recommend for A or B unchecking Maintain original as it will cause it to snap like you saw. For A, simply uncheck the transform box in the Basic tab, and check the parent constraint, and then define the parent. For the B option, I would do the same to start( uncheck transform in the basic tab), and then clear the target, uncheck the Maintain Original, and zero out any offset before then adding in the new target and turning transform back on. Or just delete the constraint and re-create it with the new target. Turning off the Maintain Original while the mode is still active will cause a refresh and then it will snap.

There's 2 sorta issues: 1. You got a ton of unnormalized weights, which isn't helping at all, but it's not the root of the problem. Open the Weights Manager(WM) via Character>Manager>Weights Manager. Select your mesh in the Object Manager(OM) and the WM. Right click in the WM and say unlock all to make sure nothing is locked, and then click the normalize button. That will fix that part of things. 2. The bigger/main reason that is happening is due to Maintain Original on the shin joints. The shin bones at the bottom of our OM hierarchy, are constrained to some IK shin bones called something different. But they are in different positions. But they have constraints with Maintain ORiginal turned on. But that option totally sucks and I wouldn't recommend using it, at least not for a transform constraint. You could do two scenarios to fix it: A. For each shin just turn off transform constraint and use a parent constraint instead(use the same target object, but just deactivate transform and turn on parent). B. Select the shin joint, click Character>Conversion>Convert to Null. Then take this null that it makes, put it as a child of the shin IK joint. And then turn off Maintain original and swap the target in the constraint to be that null you just made and reparented. Maintain Original doesn't work well for PSR/Transform Constraints. It doesn't mimic a parent child behavior which is what you really want/need here. So you need to get rid of it using either A or B above.

This has nothing to do with freezing transforms or joint/bone lengths. It's purely weighting issues. The Bind Command doesn't do a good job weighting. You need some points to be 100% to Joint 1 and others to be 100% to Joint 2. Try the attached file. folding paper.c4d

Could you give me some steps on how to reproduce the issue? I opened the Genesis 8 auto ik file from your link above, but I don't really know how to reproduce your problem. I open that file and do what to replicate your problem? My best guess is that it's rigged for characters facing Z- axis. But you have a character that is set to Z+ facing, maybe. So you rotate the model to fix that, but the rig isn't following. CTRL+LMB on the top red dot on the Genesis8_1Female joint object. Do the joints land everything line up with your character or are they facing opposite directions? If it's the latter, find you geometry, underneath should be a skin deformer(might need to unlock it to get to it), turn that off. Rotate your model to match the rig. Select the weight tag on your model, and click Set Bind Pose. Then turn back on the skin deformer. That might do it. If it doesn't let me know some steps to reproduce and I can take a look deeper and see what is going on.

You could in theory turn off selection filters so polygons and generators are not selectable. Then you should be more likely to select the spline or null controller objects.

Afraid not. I've been listening to it off and on since it was scratch tracks many many months ago. Knew it was banger first time I heard it.

I doubt it. And if we did it would take a very long time to do.

The house was rigged manually i think. It's possible FX did some stuff, I'm not super sure. We had some folks develop a sort of on the fly rigging for the house which was a set. So Animation could add some rigs to pieces as need be. The sort of tile flipping stuff, I'm not sure where that landed. I know my coworker was working on it. He had explored using MASH for Maya and we had discussed C4D and how much easier it would be in it, but i don't think any explorations there happened. My department(Character TD) primarily uses Maya. We have proprietary deformers for our rigs, and we also have proprietary solvers for cloth and hair simulations which we use for technical animation.

Same as I said before. There are a couple of frames on each transition where both characters are visible. So in the mentioned shot, when he first turns into the bigger guy, there's a couple of frames where Both characters are technically visible, but the animator posed them in such a way that you maybe see mostly the bigger guy's body but Camilo's head. So he either hid camilo's body by maybe posing it behind the other's body, and then hid the other's head by scaling it down or something. All the same sort of thing. For The transition to the little girl. It's animated with some squash and stretch, where both are visible and the little girl's rig is stretched in a way to be as long or close to as long as camilo's is, and then it's just a matter of hiding and posing. It wasn't designed for Camilo. We have a universal model topology for most of our characters which allows us to refit rigs and re-use things like weight maps and more. The majority of all characters are the same topology. For all the bipeds, I think maybe Abuela was a different topology. This is normal for all of our movies as it gives us some cost savings when rigging etc. Nothing is free, but it can get us to a better starting point faster.

So, I can explain how Camilo's transitions were done! I actually did the tech anim on a few of the shots in that video(0:25 and 0:33 and some others but those 2 were probably pertain the most to this discussion). Generally, they were done with multiple characters(elements). So in the shot at 0:25 for instance. There is a camilo element, and then an extra crowd character element(so there'd be the actual crowd, and then the same element as crowd1 that camilo turns into). Animation would animate the elements and effectively do a visibility animation(ie key visibility just on or off). And sometimes there'd be a frame or 2 overlap where they'd both be visible but similarly posed to help with the blending and such so everything doesn't completely just pop on and off. In Technical Animation, we would run the cloth and hair sims on these characters. Because there's a unified topology for the bodies, you can simply blendshape/morph one character to another. So what we would sometimes do is have a single element that blends from one character to another. This would allow us to run simulations where the cloth would react to some of the sudden change in size and shape and keep a lot of that inertia and such. Then we'd do sculpting and cleanup on top of the simulation to help sell the motion and make it look better etc. So like in that first shot, the way Camilo's poncho sort of hits this roundish shape that allows it to 'become' the sort of bib on the shirt of the crowd character. Stuff like that. There were other instances where only parts of the character would morph or it was more of a gradual change, and it was a similar workflow, but we would just sort of control where the blends were happening on the body. They were hard to do as it was a lot of managing multiple elements simultaneously and such. I'm happy to try and answer any other specific questions on the movie if I can. My roles were mostly dealing with rigging some elements, managing crowd elements, and technical animation.

Yeah. The cv weight scripts are great. I need to get them python 3 ready and add some more improvements but trying to find the time. I dont mind it for this case, but please dont share scripts from cineversity. They are made and such for cineversity and their members and blah blah blah. Just dont make a habit of it please. And thanks for the kind words about encanto. I hope folks enjoy it. I spent 18 months working on it in various capcities

That topology is not going to do you any favors. You could either do pose morph to make point base morphs for some facial animation.

If you are trying to edit and change the face rig template that ships with c4d it might just be running into an issue because it lives in the program files directory(and is effectively locked) and when you try to save your own it puts it into somewhere else. If this is what you're trying to do, open your template file, click on the top most character tag, and rename the template to something else, and then go into the Advanced tab and generate a different ID. It could be an issue of 2 things sharing the same name and unique ID causing issues.

I don't know for sure, but in your video you named both the right and left component the same name, "L_Ear" it looked like. And it's possible that's the issue. You in theory don't need the right side component and could just let the character object mirror and create the right ear by turning on Auto-Mirror in the component tag of your left ear component.

I don't have your scene file open, but all you have to do is make each axis of your controller spine drive the same axis of the corresponding joint. That's all per-object manipulation is doing. It compounds when the joints are in a hierarachy, but otherwise all it is doing is saying when X object rotates on any axis, each object rotates the same way.

The foot controller shape is just a shape. It was done that way to be a best guess to prevent a lot of reshaping of the controls themselves. Just because the shape doesn't encompass it all like that doesn't mean there will be any problems. You can adjust you character and then manually adjust the points of the controller yourself if you desire.

First thing to try is in the mirror tool, in the options tab, change it the parameter that is set to 'Rotate' to YZ and see if that one(or any of the other axes) works.

Are you using Parent Constraints in R16? They were refactored in either R19 or R20, and they don't import properly. You'd want to convert them to be a PSR constraint(ie make a null, at the location/orientation of the object with the constraint tag and put that null under the target object from the constraint, then switch it to PSR).r

Yeah it was a newer feature for R21 I think. After I sent it to MAXON I think it got mucked with a bit(Or it could be entirely my fault I don't remember) and it introduced this priority problem.

Well, the thing is, if you're using mocap(which is the intended use for that template) it was needed to work that way. If you're not using Mocap, then use the Advanced Biped rig. If you are using Mocap you could still do it by either parent constraining or psr constraining the IK controller to another object that you can treat as the IK control. Just make some object, and put the tag on the mixamo ik arm controller.

It does not say when you get access to it. So as long as you are given access to the features of the upgrade within the upgrade cycle of your MSA there are fullfilling their side of the deal. I believe they had mentioned that it is available now for Subscribers, and will eventually be met for perpetual folks. The idea is that MAXON could probably do multiple releases in a year. During that time subscribers would get them as they arrive as a perk of being a subscriber and not 'owning' the software', and perpetual licenses would get the compiled upgrade at the end of the cycle. So it's not that you won't get it, it's that you won't get it right when it's available.

There's no real easy way to do this, as different parts of the rigs would require different needs. So for Mixamo joints, it could depend on how the skeleton is handled. Usually only the root/hips has translate data on it. So that should be as simple as negating all the X value keys to go from left to right. Then it's a matter of mirroring the rotation values of the spine, and it would just take a little trial and error to figure out which keys to negate. Let's say rX is the bend forward and backward, rY is left/right and rZ is twist, you'd probably need to negate the rY and rZ channels on the spine. With the limbs, you'd want to basically swap the keys from one limb to the other, and then you'd have to do a similar trial and error of figuring out which keys to negate. When I say negate, you would select the keys of that track, and in the value field set it to be x*-1.

If you are wanting to use XRefs, they can be problematic at times. What I would suggest is that when you create your Xrefs. There's a section on the XRef that dictates what you should be able to modify when something is referenced. Make sure Hierarchy is turned OFF. You shouldn't be able to change the hierarchy of a reference. You really only want to be able to adjust Coordinates, Parameters, and User Data. Doing it this way should give you some of the more stable qualities of Xrefs.

What Everfresh said. I think you can just do it to 24. They're both set to 25, but their insertion is the problem. technically, it just needs to be above the bendy arm controller, but since that's not as easy to fix, just set it to 24

To fix the issue in your scene just do the following: Switch to full hierarchy display mode. Locate the object called: L_Forearm_Bendy_algn. Also the right side so R_etc... The constraint tag that is on that object, set it's priority to 30 instead of 0. If you wish to fix this going forward, crack open the adv_biped.c4d template and make the change in there. Choose Character>Character Builder>Save Character Template. Then it shouldn't be there going forward, but this could get blown away on any new update, just as an fyi