CINEVERSITY

Hi Dave,

Do you have none of the cloud services mentioned above?

I can set one up in the morning (Pacific Time). I wouldn't say I like to keep an upload link too long in a post.

I will have a look into it.

All the best

Thanks for the feedback, education-common,

My best wishes for your project.

My short answer is: don't. This rig is designed for Mixamo, not to have any other rig, that has many more elements, been used with it. You might explore to set up several arms during the initial set up, but it wouldn't be a Mixamo compatible rig anymore.

The medium-length answer is: (Start at: 00:34:36)
I would suggest tuning in tomorrow, Monday, at 09:00 a.m. Pacific time and asking this exact question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-VGxPgLE0c
( I QA and Timestamp the shows, so I'm super curious about the replies you get. Learning rigging should be based on as many sources as possible.)

The long reply is this link below:
To get an idea about the inner workings, there is so much in these templates that I would even start to explore to hack into its structure.
If you would like to change the template, that is explained in a more extended series and is a little bit old (interface.
https://www.cineversity.com/vidplaylist/creating_a_custom_template/
When you see how much instructional data is provided, I have no idea how to communicate this in a single thread, nor would I know how to communicate about the Python content. In other words, changing this template or structure is not my advice.

If you explore the rig, you will find that it is not one rig; it is pretty much three rigs, plus the eventually connected Mixamo from an external source.
This means the whole setup is based on four rigs; otherwise, why use the Mixamo if you don't connect it to the external rig?
You show me in the picture that you have placed just a few joints somewhere. Those will have minimal impact, as nothing previously used (external, IK, FK, nor bind) will provide them with individual information.
To call it a Mixamo rig at that point would be false.

My suggestion: make the rig edible (Character Icon active, press the C key) and place the extra joints where you like to have them.
The setup as IK/FK and Controllers can follow the same way as the default joints. Set the constraints to the IK/FK options are given as for the rest of the rig.
Weight the extra elements to the mesh, and perhaps smooth areas where previous and new weight needs to be defined.
With an Animation System, Animation Clips, that shows the same Hierarchy, it is easy to mix animation sequences.

All of that said, based on the information I got, while images have nearly no information as a project file would have, just for future questions. Thank you.

My best wishes for your project

Hi camp-education,

To "bake" a joint rig, Alembic (abc) is not the way to go. It has no concept of Joints. But yes, it turns Joints into "Nulls," and one could retrieve information from there, which feels like Destroying information while being aware of it and then putting a lot of effort into restoring it.

Why do you want to bake it? Your question is short and has very little to go on.

For external use, the FBX is a classic; for internal "baking," the Animation Clip?Motion Clip is the way to go. I place the Mixamo rig typically under Null, so I can rename it and have each time the same hierarchy, as that is important to work with Animation clips.

All the best

Hi Barend,

Since I write in a forum, I will always answer in a way that people with similar questions have use of my reply, so I always go a little bit more into detail. If possible, I have first-hand experience with it; otherwise, I mark it as brainstorming so it is clear that it needs tests.

Yes, I have not seen any Mocap in the past two+ decades that didn't need cleanup. Hence that was the main idea of Kaydara's FilmBox (Filmbox, hence FBX), which later became Motion Builder. A good average is 80% toward usable results, regardless of the system.

Yes, things might improve with tons of IR cameras, but those systems cost $100K and up. There I have only experience with it from way too long ago. Not valuable anymore.

With Rokoko, the best idea is to calibrate often, based on the motion you capture, perhaps per "take", if it goes wild. They constantly improve their system, and it is a sure thing to ensure running a newer version. Of course, as usual, early adaptors might get bitten. If you use Rokoko, take their offer with the one-hour hands-on instruction; it is a considerable value. Yes, I'm a fanboy here.

A good, even while old, book is MoCap For Artists, Focal Press. As usual, every source can hold a gem for you or steal your time based on your already-knowledge.

I would keep the Null Parent zero for P and R (S to one) and no animation. Also, while not knowing your setup, keep the Character object/Skin out of any animated parent Null. You might get double movements at one point.
In the Motion Clips, you can use a Pivot for that. Also, I keep the Character object away from the joints. You can decide how it is connected; see the image. They can live under a main Null, but there should be no mixing of information and definitely no distributed animation outside the weighting. In some cases we had here on Cineversity in the past 17+ years, it showed double movement. Not fun.

But you know better what you need, as you wrote, not a usual project. So I leave it here as a note, and you decide what fits your project anyway.

My best wishes for your project.

Screen Shot 2023-05-21 at 8.56.41 PM.png