Cineversity

I am wondering about the function of the Morph deformer.

I know how to set up Pose Morph on something like a single sphere and then modify the sphere’s geometry with different poses. I see how to use the Morph deformer with falloff to, for instance, use a linear falloff to blend between two of those poses.

But I was interested in whether or not the Morph deformer falloff could apply to a hierarchy of objects.

Here is an example of what I am talking about.

Three Spheres under a null with a pose morph tag.
The pose morph has two poses.
The only difference between the poses is the position of the spheres.
I want to animate between the two positions.

So far, all the above I can set up no problem.

BUT

I want to control the blend between the poses using falloff so that, for example the spheres begin to move from left to right.

I cannot get the Morph deformer with falloff to do anything to the above setup.  Is it not possible?

Thanks,

Lance

P.S. I know that I can do the above with Inheritance but am wondering specifically about the morph deformer.

Hi Lance,

I hope I got your idea about the setup correctly.

Please have a look here:
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/KBot07w3vjcO9zcl2VY2L3MEb5hMJsWJPTD35Ds4UEh

The trick here was to keep the name of the Weight Tags the same; otherwise, you have to drag them individually into the Restriction Tag. But I would suggest that extra work, it would be just a cleaner approach.

If you just want to move the positions, perhaps a Plain Effector turned into a deformer would work better.

Let me know if that works or if we have to look into something else.

All the best

Thank you very much for the reply. What I was looking for in my example was for the spheres to move as intact spheres.

Here is an example with a pose morph.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/omvfamjb6sxhso7/Test.c4d?dl=0

Instead of simply having all spheres move at once, can I not use a falloff to cause say, the left sphere to begin its move before the middle one, etc.
Can the morph deformer not use falloff with a hierarchy of objects in a pose morph.

Please say more about how I could use a plain effector.
The important thing is that the spheres are in two different poses and the positions are arbitrary but specific (so no cloner, or spline).

I know (now) how to do this with inheritance (setting up two identical sets of spheres in fracture objects) but thought the pose morph would be more elegant since it doesn’t require two sets of objects.

Hi Lance,

I assume that axis movement and falloffs with the Pose Morph would create conflicts. If the object moves in the opposite direction that the falloff is running, the object could be in and out of a specific value of the falloff. To keep the original position might be the answer, but if anything moves this before, then one has to memorize that position, etc. It wasn’t an option in previous versions.

The Plain Effector has the option to be set into a Deformer, including the Object seen as an axis only. Which comes close to what you would like to have. One Field can serve all Plain Effectors at once. However, even I love the simplest solution, be aware that nothing has stored the initial position, and if you shut half the way the Plain effector off, and start again from a different frame, the initial position is lost.
With the PoseMorph, that wasn’t a problem, but any change would have been.

Here is an example file and your file with a Plain Effector setup:
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/SIAi1nu2w0yUO6prEBw6fAAVHOn30oUiTYCk69w4Cnz

My way of setting this up would be with simple Polygon objects, Placed under a Connection Object For the start and one for the final position, then use the Cloner morph/inheritance setup. It utilizes more objects, but it stored all positions and can be intuitively changed at any time, or locked with the Layer Browser (Polygon Objets)

Besides, I wonder why not just set keyframes. I assume that it is more complicated and the repetition of that movement are often and more random than loop-like. Otherwise, I would have pointed to the Motion System.

All the best

Hi, thanks again!

Yes, it seems that perhaps the best way for my specific need is the Fracture/Inheritance method (which does work fine but requires 2 sets of objects).

The reason I am avoiding keyframes is because, in my actual application, I will have many objects in specific irregular positions and it is hard to orchestrate the sort of smooth wave motion start I desire with keyframes.  Multiple plain effectors would likewise be unwieldy for so many objects.

Many thanks for entertaining my question!

Lance

You’re very welcome, Lance.

Perhaps the approach to place the object in the first place should be explored. Maybe there is a way to get many objects in the way you like and be able to art direct your results.
Objects on a plane, for example, based on point selection and with the Correction deformer place them where they should be (Magnet Tool). Then use the Fields to get from one state to the other.

Example file:
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/m0poPWKCoWiDCsKrVInwQLTTRSQlCfzbO2nQinYHXjz

Let me know if that comes closer to your idea.

Cheers

P.S.:
here is a file, which showcases the problem of position change with a fall-off.
If you like to set the objects Matrix 1 or 2, you need to switch off the Xpresso on the Parent Null for the time being.
Scene file
https://www.amazon.com/clouddrive/share/EqSTpSLH64O18RO9BOEs8DLN5kiPDAIpVYZdqYO2HmW