MOD! Protection tag Xpresso



  • On 08/07/2015 at 03:55, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    User Information:
    Cinema 4D Version:   R16 
    Platform:      Mac OSX  ; 
    Language(s) :      XPRESSO  ;

    ---------
    Hi,

    I'm working with a protection tag in Xpresso.
    But to get the right Min/Max values it has been a real hell.

    I took the second Min and second Max, and gave them the values -20 and 20.
    This should be the Min/Max values of the Position Y.

    Instead this is what I get:
    - The position X has a Min value of -20
    - The Scale Z has a Max value of 20

    Why aren't the Min/Max ports sorted properly?
    The P Min X first, than the P Min Y, and so on...

    Also, why are they ALL called Min or Max?
    I mean, P Min X would've been a lot clearer...



  • On 09/07/2015 at 01:59, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hello,

    well, technically, the ports are sorted perfectly fine – alphabetically. But I agree that this arrangement is not very helpful. I'm not sure if anything can be done about it easily but you should definitely add a suggestion online.

    Beset wishes,
    Sebastian



  • On 09/07/2015 at 05:20, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi Sebastian,

    It seems that they are not sorted alfabetically, at least I can't see it.
    I firstly set the max for position to 100, for scale as well, and the max for rotation to 1000.
    Then, inside XPresso, I made 9 constants with the values 1-9. I connected them respectively with the Min-ports.

    Here are where te constants go to:

    1. Rotation Heading
    2. Position X
    3. Rotation Pitching
    4. Position Y
    5. Position Z
    6. Rotation Banking
    7. Scale Z
    8. Scale Y
    9. Scale X

    I don't see at all how this could be alfabetical.



  • On 09/07/2015 at 06:21, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi,

    One would suspect that the Min and Max are sorted the same.
    Well, when I added the Max-ports and put them with their corresponding Min-port, I get different results...

    Position X Max) 2
    Position Y Max) 8
    Position Z Max) 5
    Scale X Max) 9
    Scale Y Max) 8    Twice the constant 8???
    Scale Z Max) 7
    Rotation H Max) 229.183
    Rotation P Max) 286.479
    Rotation B Max) 401.07

    Also, every constant that should go to a Rotation value, has a Degree node for converting it from degrees to radians. I don't understand why the values still show up so high.

    Apparentally, The first min stands for the Rotation Heading and the first max stands for the Scale Y.

    I've made a list for what goes where:

    1. Min) Rot H          Max) Sca Y
    2. Min) Pos X          Max) Sca Z
    3. Min) Rot P          Max) Pos X
    4. Min) Pos Y          Max) Rot H
    5. Min) Pos Z          Max) Rot P
    6. Min) Rot B          Max) Pos Z
    7. Min) Sca Z          Max) Rot B
    8. Min) Sca Y          Max) Pos Y
    9. Min) Sca X          Max) Sca X

    The only one's that are on the same position (the 9th position) are Scale X.
    And, if it was alphabetically, shouldn't the Min and the Max be the same?

    I'm heavily confused :s



  • On 09/07/2015 at 07:00, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi,

    Also, if you start with for example the 4th Max port, than add the 5th (still visually the 4th in your tag properties) and then add the 6th (still visually the 4th in your tag properties) they don't follow their normal order :s

    4 and 5 stay the same (Rot H and Rot P) but 6 goes to Position Y, instead of Position Z.



  • On 09/07/2015 at 07:04, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi,

    For the Min ports it's even worse.
    I did the same test with 4th, 5th and 6th.
    Here are the results:
    4) Scale Y instead of Position Y
    5) Scale Z instead of Position Z
    6) Rotation B (this one stays correct)

    I guess this really is a bug.



  • On 09/07/2015 at 08:12, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    The problem is that the parameter descriptions of the Protection Tag only have the names you see in
    the Attributes Manager but have no descriptive "long name", which you would see in XPresso instead.
    (Eg. in the UserData Manager, you can specify not only a name, but also a short name which will be
    displayed in the Attributes Manager instead, the same would work for normal attributes).

    So, I guess, you could consider this a bug, or a limitation. Not sure if it was already mentioned here, but
    you can drag & drop parameters from the AM onto the XPresso node to create a port for it.

    Cheers,
    -Niklas



  • On 09/07/2015 at 09:44, xxxxxxxx wrote:

    Hi Niklas,

    Well, I didn't know about dragging and dropping parameters from the AM onto XPresso to create a node.
    Thanks for the helpful tip!


Log in to reply