Pitchipoy rig, visual representation of keys, don't visible. #50511

New Issue

Kamil Adamski · 2017-01-23T21:48:33+01:00

Kamil Adamski commented

2017-01-23 21:48:33 +01:00

System Information
Windows 7, GTX 970

Blender Version
Broken: 2.77, 2.78, and newest from builder.blender.org
Worked: The same.

Short description of error

When keying slider for change between IK/FK, keys aren't visible in DopeSheet, Action Editor, Graph Editor. Animation is working, but You can't slide key's, because they are invisible.

Exact steps for others to reproduce the error

Add Pitchipoy rig. Generate it. Add key to IK/FK slider in N panel. Select just hand bones and it should appear.

Regards,
Kamil.

**System Information** Windows 7, GTX 970 **Blender Version** Broken: 2.77, 2.78, and newest from builder.blender.org Worked: The same. **Short description of error** When keying slider for change between IK/FK, keys aren't visible in DopeSheet, Action Editor, Graph Editor. Animation is working, but You can't slide key's, because they are invisible. **Exact steps for others to reproduce the error** Add Pitchipoy rig. Generate it. Add key to IK/FK slider in N panel. Select just hand bones and it should appear. Regards, Kamil.

Kamil Adamski commented

2017-01-23 21:48:33 +01:00

Changed status to: 'Open'

Kamil Adamski commented

2017-01-23 21:48:33 +01:00

Added subscriber: @adrian2608

Joshua Leung commented

2017-01-27 02:32:59 +01:00

Added subscribers: @BrendonMurphy, @JoshuaLeung

Joshua Leung commented

2017-01-27 02:32:59 +01:00

Hrm... this is strange indeed...

What's happening here is that the slider used by the IK slider is in fact defined on a bone on a hidden layer (i.e. "MCH-upper_arm_parent.L") instead of being on the bone that the animator selects. From the name of this bone, it's obvious that this bone is part of the internal mechanisms of the rig, and shouldn't really be shown directly/edited by the animator.

The problem therefore is that the animation editors think that the property belongs to data that is currently being hidden deliberately (e.g. maybe you want to only focus on the facial controls while animating, instead of all the body controls too), so it hides all the channels like this by default, unless explicitly asked to display them.

A workaround is to enable the "Show Hidden Channels" toggle in the animation editors, though that comes with its own problems (i.e. also showing you animation on other channels you may have deliberately hidden).

Resolutions (?):

We could modify the Pitchipoy rig to have it generate another IK slider property on the "hand_fk.L" bone instead, and also generate a driver on the hidden bone that reads this value... However, since I'm not too familiar with this rig, I'm not entirely sure whether this will end up breaking other functionality. Also, it has the downside of likely breaking old files.
@BrendonMurphy - Who's the maintainer of the Pitchipoy stuff?

Hrm... this is strange indeed... What's happening here is that the slider used by the IK slider is in fact defined on a bone on a hidden layer (i.e. "MCH-upper_arm_parent.L") instead of being on the bone that the animator selects. From the name of this bone, it's obvious that this bone is part of the internal mechanisms of the rig, and shouldn't really be shown directly/edited by the animator. The problem therefore is that the animation editors think that the property belongs to data that is currently being hidden deliberately (e.g. maybe you want to only focus on the facial controls while animating, instead of all the body controls too), so it hides all the channels like this by default, unless explicitly asked to display them. A workaround is to enable the "Show Hidden Channels" toggle in the animation editors, though that comes with its own problems (i.e. also showing you animation on other channels you may have deliberately hidden). Resolutions (?): 1) We could modify the Pitchipoy rig to have it generate another IK slider property on the "hand_fk.L" bone instead, and also generate a driver on the hidden bone that reads this value... However, since I'm not too familiar with this rig, I'm not entirely sure whether this will end up breaking other functionality. Also, it has the downside of likely breaking old files. 2) @BrendonMurphy - Who's the maintainer of the Pitchipoy stuff?

Ivan Cappiello was assigned by Brendon Murphy

2017-01-27 04:54:37 +01:00

Brendon Murphy commented

2017-01-27 04:54:37 +01:00

further discussion here: #48892

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-01-27 09:24:21 +01:00

I can confirm the bug. Looking if @JoshuaLeung 's fix is breaking something else.

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-01-27 10:01:11 +01:00

Not sure it's a complete solution tough.
Then if hand_fk is not visible the problem remains. I guess exposing a separate bone at the limb's first bone to handle all the properties is a better idea. This bone can be on both FK and IK rig-layer meaning it's always visibile if at least one of them is.
Will look further into that.

Not sure it's a complete solution tough. Then if hand_fk is not visible the problem remains. I guess exposing a separate bone at the limb's first bone to handle all the properties is a better idea. This bone can be on both FK and IK rig-layer meaning it's always visibile if at least one of them is. Will look further into that.

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-05-15 12:44:25 +02:00

This is fixed in 2.79. Now the property is moved to a visible bone laying at the base of the limb.

New rigs created starting from 2.79 code will work automatically.
Old rigs should be upgraded re-assigning the rigify-types property in pose mode.

This is fixed in 2.79. Now the property is moved to a visible bone laying at the base of the limb. - New rigs created starting from 2.79 code will work automatically. - Old rigs should be upgraded re-assigning the rigify-types property in pose mode.

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-05-15 12:44:42 +02:00

Changed status from 'Open' to: 'Resolved'

Ivan Cappiello closed this issue

2017-05-15 12:44:42 +02:00

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-04 21:05:21 +02:00

Added subscriber: @RomboutVersluijs

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-04 21:05:21 +02:00

Sorry for asking here, why does blender documentation talk about v 0.5 while blender comes with v0.4?

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-08-05 09:46:39 +02:00

@RomboutVersluijs
Rigify 0.5 is bundled with blender 2.79. The documentation is referred to the upcoming 2.79 release. Since 0.5 is a major change and the old rigify was never documented and its code is going to be deprecated anyway, we decided to refer the documentation explicitly to Rigify 0.5.
If you want to test it grab your test build here: Blender 2.79 RC1

btw this wasn't the right place to ask.

cheers,
Ivan

@RomboutVersluijs Rigify 0.5 is bundled with blender 2.79. The documentation is referred to the upcoming 2.79 release. Since 0.5 is a major change and the old rigify was never documented and its code is going to be deprecated anyway, we decided to refer the documentation explicitly to Rigify 0.5. If you want to test it grab your test build here: [Blender 2.79 RC1 ](https://download.blender.org/release/Blender2.79/) btw this wasn't the right place to ask. cheers, Ivan

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-05 19:25:42 +02:00

Thanks! Sorry about the fuzz. But a little text there cant do harm. Know i went searching and searching, when i could have a little piece of text saying "this documentation is for the upcoming 2.79".

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-08-06 10:37:41 +02:00

@RomboutVersluijs, maybe you missed the first lines of the page. There's a header that states the version of the add-on and the blender release.
.

@RomboutVersluijs, maybe you missed the first lines of the page. There's a header that states the version of the add-on and the blender release. ![rigify_version.png](https://archive.blender.org/developer/F696144/rigify_version.png).

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-06 10:42:37 +02:00

Sorry but what page are you talking about? I think your talking about inside pages. Go check the link in the addon in lbender and see what info is there

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-08-06 10:51:26 +02:00

@RomboutVersluijs is the official rigify wiki page and, as i wrote previously, there's no other one since it documented for the first time in 0.5. Please look further before posting next time. And stop posting here if your question is not relevant to the topic and you already had support.

i'll post again the useful information you already had in the previous post in case you missed it:

In #50511#449663, @icappiello wrote:
@RomboutVersluijs
Rigify 0.5 is bundled with blender 2.79. The documentation is referred to the upcoming 2.79 release. Since 0.5 is a major change and the old rigify was never documented and its code is going to be deprecated anyway, we decided to refer the documentation explicitly to Rigify 0.5.
If you want to test it grab your test build here: Blender 2.79 RC1

@RomboutVersluijs is [the official rigify wiki page ](https://wiki.blender.org/index.php/Extensions:2.6/Py/Scripts/Rigging/Rigify) and, as i wrote previously, there's no other one since it documented for the first time in 0.5. Please look further before posting next time. And stop posting here if your question is not relevant to the topic and you already had support. i'll post again the useful information you already had in the previous post in case you missed it: > In #50511#449663, @icappiello wrote: > @RomboutVersluijs > Rigify 0.5 is bundled with blender 2.79. The documentation is referred to the upcoming 2.79 release. Since 0.5 is a major change and the old rigify was never documented and its code is going to be deprecated anyway, we decided to refer the documentation explicitly to Rigify 0.5. > If you want to test it grab your test build here: [Blender 2.79 RC1 ](https://download.blender.org/release/Blender2.79/) >

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-06 10:56:26 +02:00

that page is irrelevant to the the current version, acknowledge it, just saying. I took me quite some time to fin dout out this is coming for 2.79. How hard is to put 1 line on that page. Perhaps it was changed in recent days. But it was not saying blender 2.79 2 days ago. I now see blender 2.79

Ivan Cappiello commented

2017-08-06 11:25:35 +02:00

@RomboutVersluijs, the header was done before the documentation, so the only chance is you missed it.
I think there are only two different scenarios here:

the user has blender2.78 or previous. In this case he can easily see the bundled version is 0.4 and mismatches the documentation header. The documentation and release changelog state also with extreme clarity what's changed in 0.5 (Please Read: What's new in Rigify 0.5) so if the feature you are looking for is in 0.5 updates list he just grab the 2.79 and goes. As long as he can read english i can't see a real problem.
the user has blender2.79 or newer. The problem doesn't exist at all.

I am spending time on this, hoping to leave a trace for other user may have missed that lines too giving them useful information on how to approach to versioning and documentation by themselves, but is my last post on thisOFF-TOPIC thread. I am asking you again to please stop posting here if your question is not relevant to the topic and you already had support.
If you do, you know why you will get no other answers from me.

Cheers,
Ivan

@RomboutVersluijs, the header was done before the documentation, so the only chance is you missed it. I think there are only two different scenarios here: - the user has **blender2.78** or previous. In this case he can easily see the bundled version is 0.4 and mismatches the documentation header. The documentation and release changelog state also with **extreme clarity** what's changed in 0.5 (Please Read: What's new in Rigify 0.5) so if the feature you are looking for is in 0.5 updates list he just grab the 2.79 and goes. As long as he can read english i can't see a real problem. - the user has **blender2.79** or newer. The problem doesn't exist at all. I am spending time on this, hoping to leave a trace for other user may have missed that lines too giving them useful information on how to approach to versioning and documentation by themselves, but is my last post on this**OFF-TOPIC thread**. I am asking you again to please **stop posting here if your question is not relevant to the topic and you already had support**. If you do, you know why you will get no other answers from me. Cheers, Ivan

Rombout Versluijs commented

2017-08-06 11:34:09 +02:00

okay i understand. But i think there other uesres out here with the same "problem".

This line perhaps needs to be a bit more clear;
"WARNING!
RIGIFY 0.5 DOCUMENTATION PROCESS IS STILL ONGOING! WILL HOPEFULLY BE FULLY ONLINE BEFORE 2.79 FINAL RELEASE DATE.

okay i understand. But i think there other uesres out here with the same "problem". This line perhaps needs to be a bit more clear; "WARNING! RIGIFY 0.5 DOCUMENTATION PROCESS IS STILL ONGOING! WILL HOPEFULLY BE FULLY ONLINE BEFORE 2.79 FINAL RELEASE DATE.

Sign in to join this conversation.