Named Shapes & Groups
Moderators: Víctor Paredes, Belgarath, slowtiger
Named Shapes & Groups
The manual barely covers these two aspects of AS, named shapes and saved group selections. I'm curious how may here use these capabilities, and in what way??
I don't use named groups very much at all.
Usually they keep getting deleted or changed and are hard to maintain.
I use named shapes ALL THE TIME!
I have the "auto name shapes" set in the prefs. Every shape created on any layer is automatically named. Even if it is just a number I can find it and select no matter where it is in the shape order.
This feature saves me tons of time finding and selecting shapes for reordering or changing properties etc.
As I am in the early creation stage... I leave the default number names created by AS... eventully I go in and rename those shapes so they make sense.
For instance in a lip synch switch layer group... the mouth shapes could have a bunch of shapes... lips... teeth.. tongue... inside mouth... etc.
In some of those layers these shapes may be completely hidden and impossible to select if they weren't named. I always name shapes in switch layers.
This is also one of the few times I name groups as well. By the time I am doing lips synch shapes I know the points are... "done" and won't change. I name all the shapes and groups on the "first" layer before duplicating for all the other phonemes.
Now... I can easily select... the tongue... and move it... or the teeth... whatever.
-vern
Usually they keep getting deleted or changed and are hard to maintain.
I use named shapes ALL THE TIME!
I have the "auto name shapes" set in the prefs. Every shape created on any layer is automatically named. Even if it is just a number I can find it and select no matter where it is in the shape order.
This feature saves me tons of time finding and selecting shapes for reordering or changing properties etc.
As I am in the early creation stage... I leave the default number names created by AS... eventully I go in and rename those shapes so they make sense.
For instance in a lip synch switch layer group... the mouth shapes could have a bunch of shapes... lips... teeth.. tongue... inside mouth... etc.
In some of those layers these shapes may be completely hidden and impossible to select if they weren't named. I always name shapes in switch layers.
This is also one of the few times I name groups as well. By the time I am doing lips synch shapes I know the points are... "done" and won't change. I name all the shapes and groups on the "first" layer before duplicating for all the other phonemes.
Now... I can easily select... the tongue... and move it... or the teeth... whatever.
-vern
I used named point groups a lot, but much more for the initial tweaking of the character. Scale that arm! Move the eyes higher! Like that. On occasion, I'll use a point group for pupils if I'm going to be deforming them a lot. They can be very useful in the animation part. Say the character gets surprised, and you want thy're hair to move up 1/4 of a head height right there - you could set it with bones but on the fly it's easier to grab a point group you'd earlier defined, and then reset those points afterwards. IMO.
There are big advantages of using Groups - mainly for clustering all character layers together: In studio environment, you usually get yelled at for NOT grouping stuff. Because when things are grouped, you can do lots of things quickly and easily, like to reposition and scale to fit in any situation, lock one group to camera then do BiPack shots, use depth channels or add an exterior "fattening" line (aka Mr Bean) to the entire character.
With AS, yu can also export the scene with grouped character/backgrounds, then re-import each group into a new scene - great way of building reusable walk cycles, overlays or complex mechanical objects seen in many scenes - the wachy bubbling chemistry set on the Mad Scientist's bench can be built in the wide shot then reimported, rescaled and repositioned with just one keyframe in the next midshot scene.
If you group three shadow layers (all at 100% black), then apply the opacity% to the group, you don't get any double % when the character shadows cross.
Although I use styles in 99% of scenes, I've only recently started using them inconjunction with names shapes - it makes you can manage a scene entirely from within the colour box - its then easy to change the skin colour of Professor Pringle's face, hands and arms without having to click around the scene to find fills. If you work with a picky director (and I'm saying nothing 'cos I like my job), the you'll find the styles a real boost ... just code the skin colours, jacket and hand to whatever colours you want, then let the director come along and say I hate greenm make the jacket navy blue (which you do at a keystroke) then he'll say, the skin tone now looks wrong because the contrast has shifted - you change the styles and now all the face, arms legs change automatically. Great stress reliever. Even when I am working as director/compositor, I still find I am tweaking colours after a background is imported. Styles are really useful.
Rhoel
With AS, yu can also export the scene with grouped character/backgrounds, then re-import each group into a new scene - great way of building reusable walk cycles, overlays or complex mechanical objects seen in many scenes - the wachy bubbling chemistry set on the Mad Scientist's bench can be built in the wide shot then reimported, rescaled and repositioned with just one keyframe in the next midshot scene.
If you group three shadow layers (all at 100% black), then apply the opacity% to the group, you don't get any double % when the character shadows cross.
Although I use styles in 99% of scenes, I've only recently started using them inconjunction with names shapes - it makes you can manage a scene entirely from within the colour box - its then easy to change the skin colour of Professor Pringle's face, hands and arms without having to click around the scene to find fills. If you work with a picky director (and I'm saying nothing 'cos I like my job), the you'll find the styles a real boost ... just code the skin colours, jacket and hand to whatever colours you want, then let the director come along and say I hate greenm make the jacket navy blue (which you do at a keystroke) then he'll say, the skin tone now looks wrong because the contrast has shifted - you change the styles and now all the face, arms legs change automatically. Great stress reliever. Even when I am working as director/compositor, I still find I am tweaking colours after a background is imported. Styles are really useful.
Rhoel
Group FOLDERS... that is a horse of a different color.
I thought we were talking mainly about point groups?
Oh my goodness... I use way too many group folders... I love group folders. I put stuff in group folders as you said... to do things to it you can't do to a layer on its own.
That walk cycle thing!! Animate a walk cycle in place... put it in a group... move the group. Easier than trying to animate the forward motion in the cycle in my opinion... plus you can loop the walk... and still move it forward.
-vern
I thought we were talking mainly about point groups?
Oh my goodness... I use way too many group folders... I love group folders. I put stuff in group folders as you said... to do things to it you can't do to a layer on its own.
That walk cycle thing!! Animate a walk cycle in place... put it in a group... move the group. Easier than trying to animate the forward motion in the cycle in my opinion... plus you can loop the walk... and still move it forward.
-vern
Using the select points tool, select the points you want to have in a group. Say, for example, the hair. While the select ponts tool is active and the points are highlited type in a name for your selected points. In this case hair. Click on the create button and the hit the return button. Now as you click on the Select Group button you will see, "hair" as a choice in the select group menu.jhbmw007 wrote:Can someone explain how to name a group of points? I tried searching the manual but couldn't find anything about it. I see the dropdown menu for "select group" but see nothing on how to create a group...?
I use it all the time when doing point animation to select the various parts to move or rotate or scale, hands, arms, head etc. Because I usually work on only one layer. Here's why....
rplate wrote:Great question!Genete wrote: @rplate: why do you put all your drawing in a single vector layer? Whay don't you use depth sort to easy the head/body turns instead of pulling the points outside of the view? I think it is easiest to hide the shapes behind other shapes instead of puling them apart when should dissapear from the view.
Genete
Depth sort requires multible layers. When I first started rotoscoping I did put the different parts on separate layers. I soon found it cumbersum to have to switch layers every time i wanted to tweak adjoining points. Especially when two parts are joined at the seams. [move points in one layer, find adjoining layer move points, go back to first layer, move points... next layer etc, etc.
Putting everything in one layer, I feel, is so much more effecient in the work flow. When possible I use the <draw><raise and lower> shape menu.
In frame zero when I first trace the figure, I try to put the shapes into the proper draw level. So that dictates what I might trace first, second, and so on. Of course they can be changed at any time.
Sometimes as I go along I find a section that may be split apart from the original, lets say hand, and I just add a separate part and go back through the frames that don't use the new insert and pull it down off screen view.
Once the insert points are hi-lited they stay active through out and it's simply a mater of pulling it off screen at each key frame. You can add separate things along the way but don't take away or add any points to the original drawing or you'll have a scrambled animation in front of you.
I learned that the hard way.
rplate,
This is so weird...
I use to do everything on layers. I just recently switched to one layer for my character rig.
The reason was exactly as described; connected adjoining shapes. I am able to simplify my vectors for bone control much more easily by using shapes that are all part of the same mesh. I have "splits" or extra splines that divide the meshes for multiple shapes on different levels.
It is really cool! For instance I use to have two layers for the "head" or face. I had a back of the head that didn't move with the bones so that the face that did slid over it to reveal the ears.
The problem was the stupid highlights and shadows had to match perfectly or they overlapped and caused a line (shadows and highlights are a percentage of white and black for easy changing of skin colors).
By having everything in one mesh (but separate shapes) I stopped having to worry about those points "lining up" since the shapes share the same points. I just put the ear shapes between the two head shapes. The face covers and reveals the ears as it turns.
So I have a skin and a shadow shape from the same mesh on the back of the head and when the head turns one way it's overlapped by skin/shadow shapes above it from the same mesh. When the head turns the other way those shapes are revealed again and the other side is covered. But the shadow shape on the face and shadow shape on the head are perfectly aligned because they share the same "split" vector that separates them even though they are on completely different "levels".
And all of this happens with only ONE mesh on ONE layer instead of several copies each on different layers. Works like a charm and reduces redundant unnecessary points.
So now... I've had to start naming my point groups a little better.
Dang... I really really need to do some tutorials... but my techniques keep changing like the wind.
-vern
This is so weird...
I use to do everything on layers. I just recently switched to one layer for my character rig.
The reason was exactly as described; connected adjoining shapes. I am able to simplify my vectors for bone control much more easily by using shapes that are all part of the same mesh. I have "splits" or extra splines that divide the meshes for multiple shapes on different levels.
It is really cool! For instance I use to have two layers for the "head" or face. I had a back of the head that didn't move with the bones so that the face that did slid over it to reveal the ears.
The problem was the stupid highlights and shadows had to match perfectly or they overlapped and caused a line (shadows and highlights are a percentage of white and black for easy changing of skin colors).
By having everything in one mesh (but separate shapes) I stopped having to worry about those points "lining up" since the shapes share the same points. I just put the ear shapes between the two head shapes. The face covers and reveals the ears as it turns.
So I have a skin and a shadow shape from the same mesh on the back of the head and when the head turns one way it's overlapped by skin/shadow shapes above it from the same mesh. When the head turns the other way those shapes are revealed again and the other side is covered. But the shadow shape on the face and shadow shape on the head are perfectly aligned because they share the same "split" vector that separates them even though they are on completely different "levels".
And all of this happens with only ONE mesh on ONE layer instead of several copies each on different layers. Works like a charm and reduces redundant unnecessary points.
So now... I've had to start naming my point groups a little better.
Dang... I really really need to do some tutorials... but my techniques keep changing like the wind.
-vern