Claude Bonet Tag Not Found
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 03:33, xxxxxxxx wrote:
hi, nice to see someone how takes care on CBs.
perhaps this code could help you, but the values (output by console) seem to be invalid, but the amount of CBs is counted correct !!! i don´t know how to read their containing values correctly, and nobody on this forum answered me, yet :°-(
code:
--------------------------------------------------
#include <iostream.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <c4d.h>
class SMDFilter : SceneSaverData
{
public:
virtual LONG Save(PluginSceneSaver *node, const Filename &name, BaseDocument *doc, LONG filterflags);
static NodeData *Alloc(void) { return gNew SMDFilter; }
};LONG SMDFilter::Save(PluginSceneSaver *node, const Filename &name, BaseDocument *doc, LONG flags)
{
doc = GetActiveDocument();
BaseObject *obj = doc->GetActiveObject();
if(obj)
{
//Polygoncount
char polybuffer [33];
GePrint("all Vertices: ");
GePrint(itoa(static_cast<PolygonObject *>(obj)->GetPointCount(),polybuffer,10));
//Claudebonet test
BaseTag *tag = obj->GetFirstTag();
int i=0; int count;
char ibuffer [33], cbbuffer [33];
while(tag->GetType() == Tclaudebonet)
{
VariableTag *gtag = (VariableTag * )tag;
Real *cnt = (Real* )gtag->GetDataAddress();
//count = sizeof(cnt) / sizeof(cnt[0]);
count=0;
LONG anz = cnt[count];
while(anz != NULL)
{
count++;
anz = cnt[count];
}
//CBs output
GePrint(itoa(i,ibuffer,10));
GePrint(itoa(count,cbbuffer,10));
//zum nächsten Tag gehen
tag = tag->GetNext();//CBs count
i++;
strcpy(ibuffer,"");
strcpy(cbbuffer,"");
}
}
else GePrint(" - no object");
return TRUE;
}
Bool RegisterSMD(void)
{
if(!RegisterSceneSaverPlugin(1111111,"SMDex",0, SMDFilter::Alloc, EXECUTION_RESULT_OK, 0, NULL)) return FALSE;
return TRUE;
}-----------------------------------
cheers, christian -
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 06:46, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi,
@Horta: the CB tags are not on the bones but on the geometry they deform!
@dojoman: tag->GetDataCount(); will return the count
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 07:53, xxxxxxxx wrote:
@3d designer: this gives me the vertex count of the mesh as value count for every CBtag, and this can´t be correct
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 07:55, xxxxxxxx wrote:
why can´t this be correct? CB Valuse are set for every vertex, so this must be correct. What do you exactly want the count to return?
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 08:39, xxxxxxxx wrote:
the thing is, i want to know which vertex belongs to which CB,
i have heard that the indices inside the CBs are in the same order like in the mesh, so my idea was to get the count of values of every CBtag to be able to check the current index of the mesh to the corresponding index of the current CBtag by adding every CBcount to a variable (i.e.: generalcount += currentCBcount or similar) ... i hope you know what i am talking about (i am german)
or is there a better way to know which vertex belongs to which CBtag ?? -
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 08:42, xxxxxxxx wrote:
something i have to add,
the problem is that "tag->GetDataCount();" only works for variable tags, i solved this by casting the basetag, but every CBtag seems to contain as many values as the count of vertices of the whole mesh, and this isnt correct, because whenever i activate a single bone, the CBs appear by their color on a special area of the mesh, and not on the whole mesh, ... u know what i wanna say ?? -
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 08:52, xxxxxxxx wrote:
Hi,
you cannot work like this. The CB Tag is not dynamically built. It MUST have all vertices included, as each vertex receives a weight value of 0.0 when it is created. It´s not like that vertices displayed as black are not used but they have a value of 0.0!
Furthermore you cannot check which vertex belongs to which CB-Tag as there can be overlapping weights, so a unique vertex-CBtag relation is not given.
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 09:19, xxxxxxxx wrote:
oh my god !!
i followed the wrong path ... man, thank you for open my eyes :-))
now i understand it, and i can continue my plugin .. GREAT !!!!
the only not avoidable prob is, that smd only supports a 1:1 relation between vertex and bone, so that one vertex must only be influenced by one bone ... so how to set priority ? hm, this could cause hard coding
thanks anyway
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 08/01/2005 at 12:08, xxxxxxxx wrote:
oh, thx for replies
but i solved this problem some days ago hehe
yes, the invisible claude bonet tag lies on the pol object
I think the game engines today dont uses weight values for vertices, it's like vertex map, where the vertices says who is bones they are influenced. In this way, it's much more easy to calculate the final point of each vertices.
I think...And getting the CB tag, how i know wich bone it's influenced?
-
THE POST BELOW IS MORE THAN 5 YEARS OLD. RELATED SUPPORT INFORMATION MIGHT BE OUTDATED OR DEPRECATED
On 09/01/2005 at 03:29, xxxxxxxx wrote:
@horta:
there are as many CBs as bones, the CBs are the first tags which lie on the mesh, so the order of CBs is the same like the order of bones if you go through the tree passing parents and sons
rootbone1 -
-+ rootbone1_sonbone1
--+ rootbone1_sonbone1_son1
--+ rootbone1_sonbone1_son2
-+ rootbone1_sonbone2
rootbone2
-+ ...
read it recursive to get the same order like the CBtags:you should get this order:
rootbone1 > rootbone1_sonbone1 > rootbone1_sonbone1_son1 > ... > rootbone2 ...
hope this helps