View Full Version : Pole Vectors and the creation of them
05 May 2003, 01:30 PM
It says in the manual: "If you also want to create a pole vector constraint now, select one or more objects, followed by the IK rotate plane handle whose pole vector you want to constrain. "
But even though I have IK's in my setup, I have no clue how to select the rotate plane handles, and I can't see anything that looks like it might be a such.
What am I missing here?
05 May 2003, 03:14 PM
pole vector is pretty straight forward.
create any control object that you like (curve, cube ... what ever) then select this new object, shift select the ik handle and create the constraint. now the control influences the ik handle.
05 May 2003, 03:28 PM
This is really driving me up the wall!
Error: Handle must be valid and use rotate plane solver
How the devil do I add a rotate plane solver, what is it and where do I find it?!
My God Maya is confusing :(
05 May 2003, 03:32 PM
go into the AE of the ik handle and switch the solver to rotate plane
05 May 2003, 03:44 PM
I'm guessing that that will be the ikRPsolver? Changing to that makes my rig and its animation go all gooey and stuff :|
So does that mean I can't do it after creation and animation of a rig?
05 May 2003, 03:55 PM
sure you can change it, just if you've done some funky stuff or you changed the ik handles transforms or whatever, then it can go crazy. just put it into the right position after changing, shouldn't be a prob.
05 May 2003, 04:07 PM
Okay, I think I get it now! For my leg I've changed it to ikRPsolver, linked a sphere to the IK handle with a pole vector (would that be the right way to say it?).
And it works pretty good, controlling the rotation so to speak of the leg.
Thanks a lot! Ah, it feels good to make some progress finally :D
Now the next question of course is: My character is walking about in the scene, how do link the sphere's to him so that they have the right effect on his legs, while still being controllable so that I can use the pole vector...?
Is that the connection editor or...?
05 May 2003, 04:10 PM
just parent it under the appropriate node in your hirarchie. it depends on your structure, but in simple cases use the hip.
05 May 2003, 04:30 PM
Is there a way to temporarily disconnect an object from its dependencies so I can move it into the correct position after having bound it for instance as a pole vector?
05 May 2003, 05:29 PM
if you're talking about moving the pole vector object, just delete the constraint, move the object and reconstrain.
05 May 2003, 05:37 PM
i don't really understand what you mean !?!?
if you delete the constraint and move the control, then reconstraint? this would have no effect at all. would be the same like just moving the object, because the pole cons will always head for your object.
what do you mean really ?
05 May 2003, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by svenip
this would have no effect at all. would be the same like just moving the object, because the pole cons will always head for your object.no svenip. by deleting the constraint, moving the pole vector control and reconstraining you are in effect resetting the default position of that pole vector.
if you were to simply move the pole vector without deleting the constraint you're affecting the skeleton which is what Eudaimic doesn't want to do.
05 May 2003, 09:37 AM
but the ok rotate will jump to the new pos of the control object after mooved. at least this is my experience
05 May 2003, 01:21 PM
Svenip is correct. Removing and repoling is the same as just moving the pole. Because once it is constrained, that pole pivot WILL tell the ik handle which was is up. So it doesn't matter if it is unbound or not.
What you might be able to do tho is to use the pole vector, move it, then on the ikHandle itself adjust the attribute to control the twist. I forget what it is called. But one of those attrs should allow for additional SC type rotation on top of the pole vector.
offset, or twist or something like that.
05 May 2003, 04:11 PM
ahh, BIG mistake on my part. my apologizes svenip. and thank you for clearing that up mr. comet.
 emphasis on the big :)
01 January 2006, 03:00 AM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.