What free biped rig out there would you recommend?

[David Rivera]

Hello, list.

I was thinking about getting a free biped (could be toon biped) rig to try out for some animation

tests I´d like to do for a toon character. What rig would you recommend?

So far I´ve downloaded Malcom from Animation School. It´s superb. But the character is already

rigged and weighted. Moom was another favorite of mine, back a few years.

But with Gear and other systems I´ve seen, I would like you guys to recommend me one to setup

to my own character.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Pic attached.

Regards.

David.

[Szabolcs Matefy]

Gear is the most versatile stuff so far. Give it a try

[Gustavo Eggert Boehs]

What about species? Used it in a comercial back in the day (when it was called grow rig). Concept is quite nice, and now it should be a looot better (from what I can gather from the videos).

2013/8/13 Szabolcs Matefy <szab...@crytek.com>

--
Gustavo E Boehs
http://www.gustavoeb.com.br/blog

[Matt Morris]

I can vouch for Species (1.6.1), its a very solid reliable rig and saves a lot of time in the enveloping stage, even if you're not using the base mesh itself. The auto-generation of proxy and low rez meshes is also incredibly useful. Its not free however, unless there's a single user licence out there I don't know about...

--
www.matinai.com

[Eric Lampi]

I was just using it on a project, I would definately suggest trying
species. It's quite nice to work with and there is a demo version
available.

Eric

Freelance 3D and VFX animator

http://vimeopro.com/user7979713/3d-work

[Chris Covelli]

Hey Guys!

Thanks for plugging our plugin! :-D 

David, here is a link to download the original, free Grow Rig - http://www.polygonpusherinc.com/index.php/7

If you're interested in the current commercial version of Species, here is a link to our product page - http://exocortex.com/products/species

Feel free to email me with any questions you might have - ch...@polygonpusherinc.com

Cheers!

-Chris

Chris Covelli
http://www.polygonpusherinc.com/
http://exocortex.com/products/species

TurboSquid Models

[Kris Rivel]

Using species now and its great...rock solid..huge time saver.  Worth the cost.

Kris

[John Richard Sanchez]

Species rocks and it is affordable!

--

www.johnrichardsanchez.com

[olivier jeannel]

Hi guys,

Next week I shall receive a mecanical pieces generated with Solidworks.
Because I'm dealing with an agency, they might won't be able to send an
obj or fbx file.
They propose various formats :
Assemblage or Assembly (.asm)
Part (.prt)
Parasolid (.x_t)
Iges (.igs)
Step AP203 or AP214 (.stp)
IFC 2x3 (.ifc)
ACIS (.sat)
STL (.stl)
VRML (.wrl)
Universal3D (.u3d)
3Dxml (.3dxml)
Catia Graphics (.cgr)

So my question is, what format should I ask and what software would you
recomend to open and save it in a classic polymesh format ? (preferably
free...)

I have an old Deep Exploration, I was thinking giving it a try. But if
someone has a cool winning format + software to advice...

Thank you !

Olivier

[Ludovick Michaud]

Allo olivier,

I can't remember for what software/format the models where coming from. But MoI http://moi3d.com turned out to be the perfect tool to transfer from. I remember that much, the models where they came from were used to print toys for Leapfrog, like the leapster for instance. Not free, however you can certainly give the trial version a dry run.

Hope this helps,

Ludo

Ludovick William Michaud
mobile: 214.632.6756

www.linkedin.com/in/ludovickwmichaud

+Shading / Lighting / Compositing

+CG Supervisor / Sr. Technical Director / Creative Director

[Byron Nash]

We deal with receiving CAD files and ended up having to buy a license of Polytrans. It works pretty well. Before that I tried Rhino demo and some other free options but always wasted tons of time with poor results.

[Mirko Jankovic]

Also deep exploration supports bunch of formats and converts really nicely as well

[Eric Turman]

Deep exploration is great but $$$$ we ended up having to use polytrans as well. MOI3D looks very interesting if it works well though, thanks Ludo.

-=Eric

--




-=T=-

[Ludovick Michaud]

what was great about MoI is that it took even CAD models straight and we could modify the geometry like connect pieces and/or clean objects if they had issues. Also we could define the level of details at export. (Very useful when you know that the leapster model has well over 150 pieces - with lots of sub-divisions, sub-objects, etc... and you don't want to have to clean every objects in Softimage - or any mainstream 3D packages - ) 

I do remember Polytrans too, a great tool as well when it came down to the CAD models. But I switch to MoI at the time for lack of finding the license for Polytrans and I didn't regret not finding that license.

Ludo

Ludovick William Michaud
mobile: 214.632.6756

www.linkedin.com/in/ludovickwmichaud

+Shading / Lighting / Compositing

+CG Supervisor / Sr. Technical Director / Creative Director

[Paul Griswold]

I own Deep Exploration and MOI3D.  MOI is by far the better option.  It produces a very nice mesh and you have a lot of control over what's produced.  Deep Exploration isn't Deep Exploration any more.  I forget what it's called but it's owned by a huge corporation that renamed it something like Visual Enterprise.  Unless you do a ton of CAD conversions of all sorts of different formats, it's a lot of money to pay (I believe the CAD edition is an extra expense) for a file converter.

Plus MOI is a fantastic modeler.

-Paul

[olivier jeannel]

Thank you guys :)

Do you have a favorite CAD format ?

For the moment Polytrans is still a bit too expensive (according to what I'm paid for the job). Maybe Moi3d would be a better choice.
There is something called FreeCad, which I might try.
I wonder if 123D Design would offer some Translation...

Still on vacations ^^; so I can't really test. I'm trying to anticipate...

Thank you !

Olivier

[olivier jeannel]

Ever heard of Transmagic ? http://www.transmagic.com/

So everybody agrees on Moi3 :)

[Stephen Davidson]

Solid works can output to .stl and then import to MeshLab (open source)

which can output .obj, which Softimage can read.

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 4:15 PM, olivier jeannel <olivier...@noos.fr> wrote:

--

Best Regards,
  Stephen P. Davidson 
       (954) 552-7956
    sdav...@3Danimationmagic.com

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic

                                                                             - Arthur C. Clarke

[Leoung O'Young]

I have had success with Polytran importing Parasolid (.x_t)

Iges (.igs)
Step AP203 or AP214 (.stp)

STL wouldn't be my first choice

I will give MoI a try though.

[Ponthieux, Joseph G. (LARC-E1A)[LITES]]

All depends on what you want to do and what you want back as data.

 

You’ll want to stay away from .asm and .prt at these are Assembly and Part natively common to apps like Solidworks and Pro-E.

 

.Igs will give you surfaces. If you have Maya this is a reasonable choice as Maya will read this as NURBS surfaces where possible.

 

.stl will produce a reasonably good faceted file. But the application or converter you are going to needs to be able to read this.

 

.wrl is an older but reliable web based geometry format that is also faceted. It is highly compatible and readable but you may run the risk of losing groups or material ids. This tends to be a format for virtual environments or web use so exports are often tuned to low poly counts. If exported with a high tolerance(resolution) this can be very useful.

.3dxml is similar but newer and inside an xml wrapper, I think.

 

ACIS, Catia, and Parasolid are native cad formats, unless you have something to convert them with, I’d avoid them.

 

In general the list provided suggests to me that the user is strictly a CAD engineer with very little fundamental knowledge of what you do, how you do it, and why. Else he would not be suggesting some of these formats. This is quite common. Most CAD folks are very good at what they do and very knowledgeable about their software but they don’t often spend much time trying to reduce their data to usable information for 3D animation software. Which is ironic and odd given the similarities in the two professions, but still quite common.  

 

A couple of things to be aware of. Solidworks is a solids modeling software capable of generating “watertight” geometry for stereo lithography output, engineering or other high end geometry construction. The geometries are constructed using primitives and other methods which produce “solids”, or geometry which has no gaps or seams in theory.

 

Solids can be converted to surfaces, but this can be a difficult and error prone process if the operator does not understand how the geometry is needed. This has more to do with the way solids models are broken down into UV surfaces than with the operator or engineers. We, as animators, use surfaces a very specific way and people who build solids models have little reference as to why.

 

Solids can produce extraordinarily high quality facet models, with geometry evenly distributed, no gaps or seams, and at an incredibly high facet tolerance. But the operator needs to be aware of what your requirements are when converting the geometry else you can end up with too little or way too much detail. A shrinkwrap and tolerance process is often used, depending on the software, to manage the export.

 

For these reasons you want, as much as possible, to have the CAD engineer convert this geometry to a usable format directly out of Solidworks. This is the point where you will get the most control over your export.

 

To my knowledge Solidworks can also export Rhino and DXF. I’d avoid DXF if at all possible.

 

A high rez STL or WRL will probably work well.

 

Same with Rhino, but IGS is known for being a somewhat volatile format depending on what exports it and what the importer is. Its kind of like OBJ, it can be written so many different ways that one companies export is only as good as someone else’s import.

 

I typically use Maya for CAD geometry import and send that to Soft. Maya has a lot of support for CAD via it’s DirectConnect plugin.  It a really great way to go because it can read formats like Catia, UG, and PTC.

 

 

--

Joey Ponthieux

LaRC Information Technology Enhanced Services (LITES)

Mymic Technical Services

NASA Langley Research Center

__________________________________________________

Opinions stated here-in are strictly those of the author and do not

represent the opinions of NASA or any other party.

[Eric Thivierge]

Thanks for all the kind words guys! If anyone has any questions or wants a trial of species drop Chris or myself an email and we will sort you out.

[Sylvain Lebeau]

We use Gear a lot here….Also with custom stuffs build around it for our needs. Kudos goes to Miquel… 

But i also have a supreme confidence into Exocortex and Eric's and Chris work….. We don't have access to Species… So i cannot tell much about it.  We should defenitly take a look at it as well … 

good luck! 

sly

Sylvain Lebeau // SHED
V-P/Visual effects supervisor
1410, RUE STANLEY, 11E ÉTAGE MONTRÉAL (QUÉBEC) H3A 1P8
T 514 849-1555 F 514 849-5025 WWW.SHEDMTL.COM <http://WWW.SHEDMTL.COM>

[Szabolcs Matefy]

Not free, though I love Species, this is my daily tool:D

 

From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Matt Morris

Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 4:31 PM
To: soft...@listproc.autodesk.com

[Bart De Smet]

In our experience - we handle PROE cad datas from our development department on a daily basis - both the format and the settings at which the data gets exported are equally important.

The trouble with converting CAD datas is that many CAD formats are more like volumebased models, they dont have a "surface" as we know it in 3D meshes.

Converters will try to make up a surface ontop of the CAD data, but often this results in a patchwork of disconnected polygon islands, with fluctuations in the level of detail and an irratic polygon flow

What gives us the most control is to export the datas from within PRO Engineer as STL with fairly high settings, convert it to obj in Deep Exploration and then reduce the unwanted detail in SI.

Persönlich haftende Gesellschafterin:

Brandstätter GmbH, Zirndorf

vertreten durch die Geschäftsführer

Horst Brandstätter, Steffen Höpfner, Andrea Schauer

Amtsgericht Fürth: HR B 766

Shareholder liable to unlimited extent:

Brandstaetter GmbH, Zirndorf

CEO: Horst Brandstaetter, Steffen Hoepfner, Andrea Schauer

Local Court Fuerth: HR B 766

[Stephan Hempel]

Hi would strongly recommend step-Files and convert them with MoI. So
you have full control over how the geometry gets meshed (MoI has quite
some options for tuning). And ask the client to keep the assembly
groups intact. So you have all building blocks properly named as
separate objects and don't have to deal with one single piece of
geometry. This way I had never any problems.
Try to stay away from IGES. I had always problems with missing
surfaces.
STL and WRML exports are already meshed. So it can be a bit of an
problem to clean the geometry.

Stephan.

am Dienstag, 13. August 2013 um 22:15 schriebst Du:

[Leoung O'Young]

Stephan,

So Step files are better than Parasolids files?
Are you exporting obj from MoI to bring into XSI?

Thanks,
Leoung

[Stephan Hempel]

I don't know. As far as I know MoI imports only 3dm, iges, sat, step,
ai, eps, pdf and dxf.

No Parasolid files.

>From MoI I export obj. And with the export options you have good
control over the resulting mesh.

Stephan.
______________________________________________________________________
eisblau | produkt + prozessvisualisierung | animation + visual effects

Stephan Hempel
stephan...@eisblaufx.net Tel +49.(0)3643.251186 Goetheplatz 9b
www.eisblau.de Funk +49.(0)179.1356295 99423 Weimar

am Mittwoch, 14. August 2013 um 16:36 schrieben Sie:

LOY> Stephan,

LOY> So Step files are better than Parasolids files?
LOY> Are you exporting obj from MoI to bring into XSI?

LOY> Thanks,
LOY> Leoung

--
Mit freundlichen Gr�ssen
Stephan Hempel
mailto:hemp...@web.de

[Leoung O'Young]

Thanks for the info.

[Spangler Christy]

Talk about timing- I have recently been dealing with a .igs file as
well.
Deep Exploration did not import it well at all and 3D Max just choked on
it.

I imported it into AutoCAD where it looked relatively decent and
exported it as .fbx.
SoftImage imported the .fbx really well with just a few pieces out of
place.

I think I got lucky this time since in the past I've had a hard time
wrangling with .igs files and know how messy they can be.
Thank you, Oliver for the question and thank you all for the responses
and advice, I'll be checking into the recommended file formats and MoI
since I'm sure I will end up more of these file formats to work with in
the future.

Christy

-----Original Message-----
From: softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com
[mailto:softimag...@listproc.autodesk.com] On Behalf Of Leoung
O'Young
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 10:57 AM
To: Stephan Hempel; soft...@listproc.autodesk.com
Subject: Re: Dealing with CAD files format

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE - THIS E-MAIL TRANSMISSION MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY, SUBJECT TO COPYRIGHT, AND/OR EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IT IS FOR THE USE OF INTENDED RECIPIENTS ONLY. If you are not an intended recipient of this message, please notify the original sender immediately by forwarding what you received and then delete all copies of the correspondence and attachments from your computer system. Any use, distribution, or disclosure of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.

[Morten Bartholdy]

I had this recently and found that either using Rhino or Maya for converting the Iges model to polys and then into Softimage was a viable solution. One thing was clear though - Maya supports the Nurbs surfaces in the Iges file properly so rendres out of Maya didn't suffer from the discontinuities and little gaps between odd polygonal surfaces which I had in Soft.

 

So please, Soft devs, consider better support for Nurbs!

 

Morten

[Leoung O'Young]

So please, Soft devs, consider better support for Nurbs!

I agreed 100%. We keep on running into problem with imported CAD models in XSI

Leoung

[christian]

On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Morten Bartholdy <x...@colorshopvfx.dk> wrote:

I had this recently and found that either using Rhino or Maya for converting the Iges model to polys and then into Softimage was a viable solution. One thing was clear though - Maya supports the Nurbs surfaces in the Iges file properly so rendres out of Maya didn't suffer from the discontinuities and little gaps between odd polygonal surfaces which I had in Soft.

as far as i remember MOI was actually written by former rhino developers, thats why it deals quite well with the native rhino format.

overall though like already mentioned, i felt like meshing options in MOI were far superior to those in rhino. you can fine tune quite well where you want details, how to subdivide large areas and on and on. with a bit of trial and error i ended up with perfect meshes with perfect shading in softimage, while also making them as light as possible.

c.

[Daniel H]

When I go through Import FBX / Autocad .dxf all I get is a centered null even from the most simplistic DXF file containing a circle or a box. Does DXF import in Softimage 2014 just NOT work at all?

 

Daniel

VFXM

[olivier jeannel]

Hey there!
Just wanted to thanks everybody. Super good advices and experience
sharing here :)
Seems I found good combination using Moi3d (Trial) + step files.
Export looks quite correct, a little bit of weld edges and filter points
to polish all this.

Finally, the harder part was to get the correct format from the agency....


Le 18/08/2013 18:25, Daniel H a �crit :

[Leoung O'Young]

I tried the trial version of MoI3d (Trial) to bring in Step 214 , it
didn't work for me, it crashed MoI
Although Michael at MoI recommend Step 203, but I didn't have Step 203
to try.

I upgraded Polytran instead to the new 64bit version and it work great.