Release layer and points breaks flexi binding

[Daxel]

Flexi-binding is what bones do to image layers, so points being flexi-bound is not really point binding but a flexible layer binding...hence flexi-binding.

I never saw it that way, in my head when people is using flexi-binding on their vector rig they are trying to move the points with the bones, like the points of a hand with a hand bone. Layer binding only makes sense to me when you are controling the layer position.

Since point-binding and layer-binding are two different things (with different tools), it wouldn't make much sense to lump them under the same or an even longer name, like "Direct Point Binding".

Yes, the tools shouldn't be under the same name. The concept could be Direct binding for both, to explain that both are forms of binding that are atached to a bone and influenced by it directly. But of course the tools should have their unique name, that's why I proposed Direct Point binding. With layers could be Direct Layer Binding. That would have made me understand what is actually happening, what characterizes that kind of binding and why there is also a different kind of binding called flexi-binding (that I called force-binding)

Since there is no mention of "force" in Moho, except for physics, it would be better to stick with an existing reference, like "bone influence". So "Influence-binding" might work instead of "flexi-binding", but flexi-binding also implies that the artwork will be moved in a more flexible way. "Influence" or "Force" don't really convey that end result.

Totally agree. I use the program in another language and I thought that the name was force, not influence, so Influence-Binding or Bone-Influence Binding would be much better options.
When you can see by the names that you can bind points to a bone directly or to the bone influence, you can start imagining that the influence binding is going to be flexible, but those names are only titles, that in my opinion should be complimented with contextual hints, like:

Direct Point Binding: "Instead of using influence binding, the selected points will be bond directly and only to the selected bone, ignoring its influence"

Something like that. Maybe everyone is different but at least in my head that would have been much clearer.

[Greenlaw]

Bind Layer and Bind Points are fine. To me, these two are short and clearly named. I don't wish to see the names get longer.

I'm also fine with Flexi-bind...the concept, at least the way it's implemented, is unique to Moho, so I don't mind the uniquely branded name. Plus, it sounds cool.

I just feel Use Selected Bones For Flex-binding is unwieldy as a menu command and in conversation. Selective Flexi-bind or Local Flexi-bind or Defined Flexi-bind or Explicit Flex-bind or Partial Flexi-bind or Limited Flexi-bind...any of these are shorter and still descriptive about what it does. Heck, just dropping the '-ing' helps.

[chucky]

I agree that "Use Selected Bones For Flexi-Binding" could be shortened to something like "Selective Flexi-Binding", since it's already in the bone menu. And "Create Smooth Joint For Bone Pair" could be something like "Smooth Joint Pair". But yeah, tooltips or a contextual "?" help button could make a lot of the manual info readily available, without looking anything up.

This is a very sensible suggestion Wes.
That deserves a request.

[Daxel]

Haha maybe its just me that had a hard time fighting those concepts. When I saw that there were two flexi-binding modes, and one of them was called flexi-binding, I almost got TOC.
At least I think we could agree that contextual description while hovering over the tools and commands would be a great addition, and should be pretty simple to implement. When I try a program for the first time and it has that is like HELL YEA LOVE IT.

[arglborps]

"Force-binding" sounds like you're forcing the binding (instead of leaving it up to the automated function) which sounds more like point binding to me…

[chucky]

You can flexi bind selected points or layers.

Or you can bind points individually.
You can also bind whole layers individually.

[arglborps]

So maybe call it "dynamic binding" and "fixed binding", although I think the term "flexi bind" does the job. I didn't find the concepts hard to understand, I found the interaction to be somewhat inconsistent, like it was mentioned before once you bind points to bones there's no intuitive way to just go back to flexi binding.

One would expect, once I unbind the points from a bone they'd go back to flexi binding which is after all the default state initially, but they don't and I have to basically reset the whole rigging, undoing all the other work done on binding on that rig. Makes no sense.

[Greenlaw]

You can even mix Point binding and Flexi-binding in the same layer...a very useful trick I use all the time!

The difference is that Point binding locks a point to a single bone, but Flexi-binding can get influence from multiple bones, so the result can be more squishy or organic. But sometimes you want some points in a layer to be locked to a bone (like, say, in the shoulders), and other to flex naturally when a multiple joints are bending--this is a where using both methods works best.

Layer binding is kinda like Point bindng but for the entire layer. I like using this for layers and groups where I don't want bones deformation to occur, like mouth Switch layers and other facial items. It's also a quick and easy way to attach props to a character. The catch with Layer binding a groups is that bones cannot affect layers inside the group can't be bound with bones from the parent layer, which can be a limitation for some face setups. in this case, you need to not use Layer binding an simply bind all the layers to bones individually. (Not a big deal since Moho will let you bind multiple selected layers all at once.)

[chucky]

I think, rather than playing with names at this stage it might be a better advancement to move onto weight painting as an enhancement that moves Moho forward.
At that stage a bit of a reset could happen to the binding system as the concepts of weight will push both flexi and rigid to the side and conform more closely to standard 'binding principles' of other apps.


Weights seem to me to be an inevitable advancement, there's just a few more urgent considerations to take care of first, I believe.
In the meantime... yes do read the manual

[SimplSam]

I think weight painting will come, but it will be in addition to everything else that is already here. It is essentially an advanced flexible-strength bone binding system.

Additionally, at least in 2D, I currently only see weight painting being widely used for meshed cut-out Games rigs.

[synthsin75]

I agree with Sam. And at this point, I think some of us are trying to think of small, easy to implement improvements for the immediate future.

[arglborps]

Interestingly Blender Grease Pencil uses mesh warping for vectors and does it well. AFAIK you can also use weight painting on the meshes with vectors there. Would be interesting to see whether in the future smart meshes could also be used for vector drawings on Moho.

[Greenlaw]

And at this point, I think some of us are trying to think of small, easy to implement improvements for the immediate future.

And I agree with Wes.

For me, Moho can be greatly improved with a few 'small' fixes and feature enhancements I've described elsewhere. ('small' is in quotes because I don't really know how difficult these requests are to implement.) Moho 12.5 is already an incredibly powerful animation tool, and there are only a few UI and I/O (Moho Exporter and Layer Comp) enhancements I really need to make my workflow significantly more efficient (at home and at my workplace.) Focus on that and Moho can find wider acceptance at studios.

New 'headliner' features can come later after Moho affirms its position as the best 2D puppet animation program available.

Go Team Moho!