[x3d-public] FW: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2: HAnim MotionCapture -V1.0 (Michalis Kamburelis)
GPU Group
gpugroup at gmail.com
Sun Jun 28 05:20:50 PDT 2020
Thanks Andreas - I will study your prior work.
-Doug
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 6:59 PM Andreas Plesch <andreasplesch at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I took the opportunity to look up my older notes on an attempt to
> translate gltf skins to HAnim:
>
> https://github.com/andreasplesch/x3dom/wiki/RiggedSimple-glTF-conversion
> https://github.com/andreasplesch/x3dom/wiki/HAnim-and-glTF-skins
>
> There should be also a list thread with Joe discussing things.
>
> I do not have the stomach to dive back into this but I remember while
> overall the data structures are fairly similar between gltf and HAnim,
> the main difference is that in gltf each skin vertex is affected by
> all joints and therefore needs a quite a lot of data (joint indices
> and weights - many 0) while in HAnim the mapping is the opposite: each
> joint is associated with only the selection of vertices which it
> affects. This is more efficient and author friendly but in the end the
> GPU needs a joint matrix for each vertex anyways. gltf is more GPU
> friendly as this is the main idea behind it.
>
> This is mainly the reason as far as I remember that it actually might
> work better to use the gltf skin data structure as a base and
> translate HAnim into gltf but I did not explore that any further.
> HAnim I think could also be done on the GPU, after some processing.
>
> In terms of the spec. and underlying principles, I remember that I
> struggled with gltf and that a somewhat unofficial overview was
> actually crucial. I think I have a long gltf github issue on skins
> somewhere. I did find the HAnim spec. easier and more logical to
> digest maybe because I read it first.
>
> my 2c, -Andreas
>
> > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2020 02:10:57 +0200
> > From: Michalis Kamburelis <michalis.kambi at gmail.com>
> >
> > There are some misconceptions in this thread about the glTF skinned
> > animation.
> >
> > E.g. this statement is simply not true: """This is why some of those gltf
> > file sets are so big, right. It is because it does not represent actual
> > user code (except for maybe the person who lives in there) but
> precomputed
> > stuff. With a file for each vertex for each frame. From the gltf it is
> not
> > that easy to reconstruct the actual animation routine or even the
> > bindings.""""
> >
> > The glTF file doesn't contain the baked animation, it doesn't contain the
> > vertex position at each frame or anything like that.
> >
> > glTF skinned mesh specifies, for each vertex, which bones have an effect
> on
> > this vertex (and with what weight). It's exactly like in all 3D
> > authoring/modeling software (and like H-Anim too). The skinned mesh is
> > affected by a hierarchy of bones (glTF nodes), much like a hierarchy of
> > Transform in X3D or Joints in H-Anim.
> >
> > glTF adds to this the "inverseBindMatrices" information, which allows to
> > quickly figure out "how do my vertexes change, when my bone
> transformation
> > change". It's a crucial structure to perform skinned animation easily and
> > efficiently. It also allows to perform skinned animation fast, in
> > particular you can do it completely on GPU in shaders. It's not a large
> > structure in terms of file size (1 matrix for each joint).
> >
> > Information about how the inverseBindMatrices could be translated to X3D
> > (such that the resulting X3D node graph still has all the information how
> > to perform this animation efficiently) would be appreciated.
> >
> > The glTF skinned animation specification is very simple, it's way simpler
> > and shorter than H-Anim. It's just a section "Skins" in glTF spec:
> > https://github.com/KhronosGroup/glTF/tree/master/specification/2.0#skins
> .
> > You can also take a look at
> > https://www.slideshare.net/Khronos_Group/gltf-20-reference-guide , where
> > the skinned animation in glTF explanation takes 1.5 page (pages 5-6 of
> that
> > PDF).
> >
> > Regards,
> > Michalis
> >
> > niedz., 28 cze 2020 o 00:55 John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
> napisa?(a):
> >
> > > Someone must check tidy output manually. Can you confirm that tidy is
> > > doing the right thing? Maybe rerun tidy and see if anything changes?
> > >
> > > I have been pretty much zonked for a couple of weeks. I think Don did
> > > create some kind of mapping table if I read my email correctly.
> > >
> > > John
> > > On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 10:24 AM GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Tidy has such a big list - overwhelming for a human. So that would be
> > >> good for some of the little things at the end. Getting the list down
> to
> > >> human size first would help.
> > >> Tidy has suggestions for some. Getting those nuisance / annoying /
> > >> routine substitution things out of the tidy log first by automation
> would
> > >> help get it closer to human scale.
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 9:17 AM John Carlson <yottzumm at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Maybe we need some practice manually fixing before automating?
> > >>>
> > >>> John
> > >>>
> > >>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 7:47 AM GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> https://www.web3d.org/x3d/content/examples/HumanoidAnimation/build.X3dSchematronX3dTidy.log.txt
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> If its this tidy stuff, is there a way to automate some of the
> fixing?
> > >>>> It looks like tidy has some ;guesses' for some of the names. And
> for other
> > >>>> names a human could probably guess, if it was in a list / lookup
> table.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I wonder if there's a way to get tidy to put out its complaints
> into a
> > >>>> form that could be used by a string substitution utility. Or scrape
> a
> > >>>> lookup table from the tidy log?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> So it could all be done in a day.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 12:33 AM Joseph D Williams <
> > >>>> joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Friday, June 26, 2020 9:53 PM
> > >>>>> *To: *GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> > >>>>> *Cc: *X3D Graphics public mailing list <x3d-public at web3d.org>
> > >>>>> *Subject: *RE: FW: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2:
> HAnim
> > >>>>> MotionCapture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - Getting past blockages in the HAnim project and on to node
> > >>>>> improvements might help later when harmonizing with glTF
> skinning.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Any hanim blockages are just getting some really rather
> > >>>>> straightforward simple updates (names and hierarchies) done.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> We are already harmonized with gltf, because it is the same data in
> > >>>>> json form as we author in x3d human-readable form. Nothing magic
> or not
> > >>>>> harmonious, just the gltf data is built for hardware instead of
> humans. If
> > >>>>> you have figured out what the gltf stuff is and how to use it,
> then you
> > >>>>> will have learned about x3d hanim.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Likewise, the reverse is true but it is more difficult because the
> > >>>>> gltf data is so scattered around. For example, the skin
> deformation is
> > >>>>> indexed by vertex usually with about 16 (for convenience) joints
> and
> > >>>>> weights, and one of these for each vertex. If you look at hanim
> Joint, the
> > >>>>> vertices and weights associated with each joint are listed in the
> Joint
> > >>>>> node. So, what would you do with hanim Joint data to create some
> gltf
> > >>>>> vertex objects?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Friday, June 26, 2020 3:46 PM
> > >>>>> *To: *Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> > >>>>> *Cc: *X3D Graphics public mailing list <x3d-public at web3d.org>
> > >>>>> *Subject: *Re: FW: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2:
> HAnim
> > >>>>> MotionCapture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Q. HAnim Examples > What does the to-do list look like?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I ask because I got a sense that no new / modified HANim nodes
> would
> > >>>>> be considered beyond official HAnim2 until examples cleaned up.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Is there anything blocking that? I ask in case someone has
> > >>>>> something that can help.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> One thing that popped to mind: is there a problem getting authors
> > >>>>> permission? If so and an example was demonstrating a particular
> thing,
> > >>>>> perhaps that scene can be dropped and a new one authored or
> volunteered by
> > >>>>> others reading this who may be sitting on some assets or
> capabilities that
> > >>>>> can volunteer equivalent scenery.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -Doug
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> more..
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On the horizon: glTF skinning which may have the effect of
> bypassing
> > >>>>> HAnim, perhaps obsoleting HAnim in practice.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> https://www.khronos.org/files/gltf20-reference-guide.pdf
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - p.5,6,7
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Getting past blockages in the HAnim project and on to node
> > >>>>> improvements might help later when harmonizing with glTF skinning.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 3:52 PM Joseph D Williams <
> > >>>>> joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - My conceptual model is a bit different.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> That is OK by me as long as it works. Whatever, Joint hierarchies
> will
> > >>>>> operate just like practical hierarchies of standard x3d Transform
> nodes,
> > >>>>> using center of rotation concept.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For the Humanoid, if there are more joints in the capture than the
> > >>>>> playback, then you ?ignore? some sets of values. If there are more
> joints
> > >>>>> in the playback than the capture, then, if the hierarchy is still
> ok, you
> > >>>>> don?t send events to the extra joints, or just send the default.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The x3d tool should be able to help an author by first giving a
> list
> > >>>>> of what joints, segments, sites are available in the playback
> skeleton
> > >>>>> defined In the Humanoid skeleton. All the author needs to do to use
> > >>>>> existing x3d timer/interpolator/route animations is connect up the
> > >>>>> animation events to the skeleton Joint DEFs. Multiple, selectable
> animation
> > >>>>> routines can reside inside or outside the Humanoid, and prototype
> behaviors
> > >>>>> are very usable and very sharable between similar characters. In
> general,
> > >>>>> these animations are designed for realtime rather than frametime,
> but of
> > >>>>> course can be used to produce a frame at any time. However, these
> > >>>>> animations by themselves may not directly define the skeleton they
> apply
> > >>>>> to, or the initial pose.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For x3d HAnim Humanoid Motion style, I think we are trying to
> access a
> > >>>>> perhaps more public range of animations, by the easiest way
> possible. From
> > >>>>> what I have seen these mostly use capture intervals related to
> video or
> > >>>>> film and are typically oversampled for typical realtime needs, and
> also,
> > >>>>> since mainly using xyz data, are subject to unpredictable
> animations,
> > >>>>> particularly fast wide motions. However, we want to make it
> convenient for
> > >>>>> an author, so we want to use the data in the bvh file to help
> connect the
> > >>>>> skeletons with the data.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Turns out this may be easy because the bvh file contains
> configuration
> > >>>>> data for the capture skeleton as well as the animation data. Now
> all we
> > >>>>> must do is connect the skeletons and then the data and events are
> all
> > >>>>> handled under the covers. In this case, it is possible that a tool
> could
> > >>>>> for example, display a model of the capture skeleton and the
> playback
> > >>>>> skeleton to help the author decide how to proceed, or even, if the
> names
> > >>>>> matched, do it automagically.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> A Humanoid Motion animation resides in the Humanoid object and for
> > >>>>> best automation, should include enough information to reconstruct
> the
> > >>>>> capture skeleton hierarchy. In order to establish this baseline,
> the
> > >>>>> existing Motion node wants the author to transcribe important bvh
> data into
> > >>>>> x3d data forms and place it within the Humanoid Motion node. This
> practice
> > >>>>> also tends to help transportability between various typical capture
> > >>>>> skeletons and x3d hanim ?standard? skeletons.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - Your loa4 idea makes sense if you don't want to ignore?.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I still think the idea behind ?ignore? is that if you have more
> joints
> > >>>>> and data in for the capture skeleton than the playback skeleton
> can use.
> > >>>>> The author has determined that some of the capture data has to be
> ignored
> > >>>>> and not sent to playback skeleton, so those joints are labeled with
> > >>>>> ?ignore? keyword in order to declare that the related data is not
> to be
> > >>>>> used. Please tell me if this is not what is intended.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If that is the case then the playback skeleton will never know
> because
> > >>>>> no events are sent to joints that are not there.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If you have more joints in the playback skeleton, then it is ok
> and no
> > >>>>> capture data needs to be ignored and playback joints that don?t
> get data
> > >>>>> don?t care and work as if not there.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks for thinking about this,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, June 24, 2020 4:33 PM
> > >>>>> *To: *Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> > >>>>> *Cc: *Spec Feedback <spec-comment at web3d.org>; x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2: HAnim
> > >>>>> Motion Capture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My conceptual model is a bit different.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - skeletal joint asks for joint information from
> > >>>>> MotionData/MotionClip, joint by joint when traversing the skeletal
> joint
> > >>>>> hierarchy.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Your loa4 idea makes sense if you don't want to ignore.And
> -depending
> > >>>>> on your implementation, like you say you'd get identity transforms
> -no
> > >>>>> joint motion- for joints MotionClip doesn't have.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -Doug
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 5:20 PM Joseph D Williams <
> > >>>>> joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - and they have a brief statement somewhere saying its ignored
> ie
> > >>>>> the values field has it, but the humanoid doesn;t.
> > >>>>> - But they didn't say mathematically what to do about it.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> OK, so there are Motion values for a joint in from the capture
> > >>>>> skeleton but either they do not apply to a Joint in the playback
> skeleton,
> > >>>>> or there is no corresponding joint in the playback skeleton. Thus,
> as an
> > >>>>> author, you just want to ignore that set of values in the Motion
> values
> > >>>>> field.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> For a typical animation routine, if you send events to a node that
> is
> > >>>>> not there, you get an error.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If there is a Joint in the capture skeleton that does not appear in
> > >>>>> the playback skeleton, then you don?t try to send events to that
> joint,
> > >>>>> because it is not there. So, if the Joint is actually present,
> then that
> > >>>>> Joint will remain in its default orientation.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This is OK, and the skeleton does not mind at all, it is like the
> > >>>>> Joint is not there except it is and may have child Joint
> hierarchy. Of
> > >>>>> course in that case the parent of the ignored joint controls the
> child
> > >>>>> hierarchy. If whatever animation device is under the covers thinks
> it must
> > >>>>> send data to that joint, then don?t use the Motion values, just
> send 0 0 1
> > >>>>> 0 each cycle.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ignore, means Hey, my capture skeleton has a Joint and I have data
> for
> > >>>>> it but my playback skeleton does not have that joint. I am trying
> to
> > >>>>> import, for example, some LOA4 animations into my LOA3 playback
> skeleton.
> > >>>>> As an author you are choosing to refuse to give your loa3 an
> update and you
> > >>>>> must confess that fact by using IGNORE in your Motion node list.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> At least that has been my experience, when using animations aimed
> at a
> > >>>>> higher or lower loa than the playback skeleton. For lower loa
> playback
> > >>>>> skeleton, just comment out the interpolators and routes for the
> unused
> > >>>>> Joint nodes. If higher loa playback skeleton, then problems
> because the
> > >>>>> hierarchy does not care about ignoring intermediate joints. Just
> don?t send
> > >>>>> data or if you must, just send 0 0 1 0 to the ignored joint.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> This is again why you want to just go ahead and start work with the
> > >>>>> loa4 playback skeleton. Because it is ok to ignore it if you don?t
> have
> > >>>>> data for it. It is always not ok to not send data to something
> that is not
> > >>>>> there and any browser should tell you and probably should fail if
> you try
> > >>>>> to do that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, June 24, 2020 3:33 PM
> > >>>>> *To: *Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> > >>>>> *Cc: *Spec Feedback <spec-comment at web3d.org>; x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2: HAnim
> > >>>>> Motion Capture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The IGNORED is in the Motion AnnexD example scene:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> <HAnimMotion frameCount="392" enabled='true' loop='true'
> frameTime =
> > >>>>> "0.033333" frameDuration=".033333"
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> joints="humanoid_root, l_hip, l_knee, l_talocrural,
> r_hip,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> r_knee, r_talocrural, vl5, IGNORED, l_shoulder,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> l_elbow, l_radiocarpal, IGNORED, r_shoulder,
> > >>>>> r_elbow,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> r_radiocarpal, IGNORED, skullbase"
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> and they have a brief statement somewhere saying its ignored ie the
> > >>>>> values field has it, but the humanoid doesn;t.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> But they didn't say mathematically what to do about it. My
> > >>>>> interpretation is that you would accumulate the ignored values as
> you go
> > >>>>> down the bvh limb tree to get the next joint. If you're working
> > >>>>> call-by-call, to make sure the transform fetcher understands
> what's been
> > >>>>> skipped, you woult tell it the previous joint you asked for when
> asking for
> > >>>>> the next (and it would look at the bvh and see you are ignoring
> some joints)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> getNextJointTransform(lastJoint,currentJoint,time,&transform)
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> something like that. I'm not doing that yet, and haven't proven the
> > >>>>> theory of joint transform accumulation.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The likely reason the AnnexD model didn't seem to mind / looked
> like
> > >>>>> its bvh animation in blender: the IGNORED values were zeros
> anyway. I was
> > >>>>> lucky,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The nature of matching up free downloaded bvh with any loa hanim
> > >>>>> character I have means we;ll be skipping and some and some joints
> never
> > >>>>> captured by the mocap system / not in the bvh list. For freewrl
> users,
> > >>>>> that's OK - doesn't need to be perfect, just needs to get us into
> the game
> > >>>>> and having fun experimenting. .
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -Doug
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 4:18 PM Joseph D Williams <
> > >>>>> joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - - IGNORE - the transform fetcher needs to accumulate the
> ignored
> > >>>>> transforms to apply to the next non-ignored joint in the
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Not sure what the transform fetcher does but this is no different
> than
> > >>>>> having an intermediate joint that is not animated.? In operation,
> not
> > >>>>> animating a Joint does not cause any problems. That is why it is
> always
> > >>>>> good to pick the loa4 skeleton for most fun. If a joint is
> ignored, it is
> > >>>>> just not animated and remains in its default position. Its
> children may
> > >>>>> still be animated.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Anyway, am I missing something? Ignored just means there is no
> > >>>>> animation driving that Joint. The bigger problem is when you have
> animation
> > >>>>> trying to drive a joint that is not there. Mostly the browser will
> tell you
> > >>>>> that.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - No need for the software to complain if bvh doesn't match.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think if Motion node cannot find a matching Joint somewhere, then
> > >>>>> failure until you get the list right and all named joints matched
> up[.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If you look at some sample typical timer/interpolator/route setup
> and
> > >>>>> you try to drive a joint that is not there or has the different
> name, then
> > >>>>> it will usually tell you about missing sources or targets. Maybe I
> don?t
> > >>>>> understand what ignore refers to? What does ignore refer to? A
> Joint in the
> > >>>>> Humanoid skeleton, a joint in the capture skeleton, or a set of
> data for a
> > >>>>> joint in the bvh file?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Thanks,
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *GPU Group <gpugroup at gmail.com>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Wednesday, June 24, 2020 5:56 AM
> > >>>>> *To: *Joseph D Williams <joedwil at earthlink.net>
> > >>>>> *Cc: *Spec Feedback <spec-comment at web3d.org>; x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>> *Subject: *Re: [x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2: HAnim
> > >>>>> Motion Capture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> No need for the software to complain if bvh doesn't match.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Already in the HAnim2 specification for Motion they use the IGNORE
> > >>>>> keyword when when HH is skipping a joint the bvh has. Not shown in
> the
> > >>>>> spec, but likely to happen is the bvh not having a joint that the
> HH has,
> > >>>>> what I call NOT_IMPLEMENTED, to keep it separate from IGNORE
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - IGNORE - the transform fetcher needs to accumulate the ignored
> > >>>>> transforms to apply to the next non-ignored joint in the limb tree
> I didn't
> > >>>>> do this yet, but should have it somewhere, so it applies also in
> in the
> > >>>>> original Motion node if there are IGNOREs.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - NOT_IMPLEMENTED (bvh doesn't have the joint) - the HH would get
> an
> > >>>>> identity transform back for that joint.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -Doug
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 9:36 PM Joseph D Williams <
> > >>>>> joedwil at earthlink.net> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - Then one mapping node ?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Currently the Humanoid skeleton declares its active Joint nodes by
> > >>>>> naming each Joint node and by including list of used Joints in the
> Humanoid
> > >>>>> joints field.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think the Motion node also declares the joints it wants to use by
> > >>>>> listing in the Motion node.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> To my knowledge there is no requirement that the Humanoid joints
> list
> > >>>>> be in any specific order.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> I think the Humanoid Motion joints field needs the list in some
> order
> > >>>>> relating to the data.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The point is that for Motion to work, it must find the appropriate
> > >>>>> Joint name in the Humanoid joints field.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> My only big point is that both of those lists should look about the
> > >>>>> same (MF strings). If you want a skeleton that is matched to the
> bvh data,
> > >>>>> then we change the names in the imported bvh to match the names
> used in the
> > >>>>> skeleton field and enumerated in the Humanoid joints field. Some
> help could
> > >>>>> be given to an author helping to match the bvh skeleton
> nomenclature with
> > >>>>> the Humanoid joints. Or if you are really serious about using bvh
> data,
> > >>>>> then gather enough examples to suggest a ?typical standard? bvh
> skeleton
> > >>>>> and data, then compose a skeleton in the Humanoid skeleton field
> to match
> > >>>>> and then you might use a ?typical standard? Motion fields.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> The main idea of the Humanoid joints field is to list the actual
> > >>>>> joints that are available in the skeleton model. The purpose of
> the joints
> > >>>>> list in the Motion node is to declare which of those joints will
> be active
> > >>>>> in the current simulation. In this case, if the capture skeleton
> is the
> > >>>>> same as the playback skeleton, no problem to just change the data.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> So, the only things the browser needs to figure out is: Do the
> Motion
> > >>>>> joints match the skeleton joints and complain if not.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Best Regards and Thanks for thoughts on this.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Joe
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> *From: *Spec Feedback <spec-comment at web3d.org>
> > >>>>> *Sent: *Tuesday, June 23, 2020 6:02 AM
> > >>>>> *To: *x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>> *Subject: *[x3d] Spec Comment by dougsanden on 19774-2: HAnim
> Motion
> > >>>>> Capture -V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -- Submitter indicates that this comment may be public: *Yes* --
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Comment on 19774-2: HAnim Motion Capture - V1.0
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -----------------
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Proposed Explicit Name Mapping node
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> NameMapping
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> MFString A []
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> MFString B []
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Esample:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Discussion:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> not necessary to have IGNORED or NOT_IMPLEMENTED - that would be
> the
> > >>>>> default
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> if not found during lookup.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Then one mapping node can be used for multiple .bvh from various
> > >>>>> sources.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Putting a mapping node into both HAnimHumanoid HH and
> > >>>>> HAnimMotionClip/Data
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> HMC would allow a 2-step lookup:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - HH to loa, loa to HMC
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - A previous comment shows the math advantage of 2 step
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> If no mapping nodes present, browser would assume names are same
> in HH
> > >>>>> and
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> HMC
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> - if one mapping node in either HH or HMC, then a 1-step lookup is
> done
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> -----------------
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Submitted on Tuesday, 2020, June 23 - 7:02am
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> by dougsanden (dougsanden )
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> IP: 75.159.18.239
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> See: https://www.web3d.org/node/1694/submission/4051
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> x3d mailing list
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d_web3d.org
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>>> x3d mailing list
> > >>>>> x3d at web3d.org
> > >>>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d_web3d.org
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> _______________________________________________
> > >>>> x3d-public mailing list
> > >>>> x3d-public at web3d.org
> > >>>> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
> > >>>>
> > >>> _______________________________________________
> > > x3d-public mailing list
> > > x3d-public at web3d.org
> > > http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
> > >
> > -------------- next part --------------
> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> > URL: <
> http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20200628/82c433f3/attachment.html
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > Subject: Digest Footer
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > x3d-public mailing list
> > x3d-public at web3d.org
> > http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------
> >
> > End of x3d-public Digest, Vol 135, Issue 175
> > ********************************************
>
>
>
> --
> Andreas Plesch
> Waltham, MA 02453
>
> _______________________________________________
> x3d-public mailing list
> x3d-public at web3d.org
> http://web3d.org/mailman/listinfo/x3d-public_web3d.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://web3d.org/pipermail/x3d-public_web3d.org/attachments/20200628/de169b69/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the x3d-public
mailing list