Hierarchy Modifier and Mesh Bounding Box?

Helper

THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

On 01/05/2006 at 17:10, xxxxxxxx wrote:

User Information:
Cinema 4D Version:   9.102
Platform:   Windows ; Mac ; Mac OSX ;
Language(s) :     C++ ;

---------
There is one very annoying property to my plugin that should be resolved prior to beta-testing. It involves my plugin hierarchy modifier objects (bones) which use ModifyObject() and the bounding box for the PolygonObject that they deform. In the case of my modifiers, transformations of the root bone are done to the bone which seems to cause this dislocation of the PolygonObject and its bounding box. This wouldn't really matter much except that Editor display clipping seems to be using the bounding box. When the bounding box goes out of the display, the PolygonObject, although fully in the display, disappears.

I guess one solution may be to always translate/scale/rotate the PolygonObject for the root bone. Is there something missing or a technique that should be employed to keep the bounding box up to date and properly aligned with the deformed PolygonObject (noting that, yes, I am calling polyobject->Message(MSG_UPDATE))?

Thanks,

Helper

THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

On 01/05/2006 at 18:03, xxxxxxxx wrote:

Hmmm, I'm implementing GetDimension() as I write this, but am thinking that the updated bounding must be calculated during the ModifyObject() call (on the 'op' deformed-copy of the PolygonObject). Is that correct?

Thanks,

Helper

THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

On 01/05/2006 at 21:12, xxxxxxxx wrote:

Okay, so just implementing GetDimension() and bounding my modifier objects is enough to stop the vanishing PolygonObject.

Thanks,

Helper

THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED

On 02/05/2006 at 00:37, xxxxxxxx wrote:

ah, have just seen this thread. First of all, great you managed it yourself second, great to hear this as I had the exact same problem but never got around it checking what the problem was. So thanks for clearing this up!