also can i turn my rig it won't let me rotate the whole model and skeleton just the controls main rig. as we want it to be set to Z for unreal. thoughts?

okay a prior one worked, but this updated one didn't. could it be due to adding in my own controls for the eyes? I added in unique controls for the eyes not realziing back then I could just add th em in via rrm3. i take it rrm3 acts funky if i add in my own?

here we go. this is what i get after I export. cmds.rapidRigModular3() # Warning: No Settings Loaded select -r hound ; select -r controlRig ; Detaching controlRig "controlRig" is not referenced # Warning: Nothing is selected. Select objects or components to delete. # Traceback (most recent call last): # File "C:\ProgramData/Autodesk/ApplicationPlugins\rrm3\Contents\scripts\gui\main_tabs_export_rig.py", line 77, in # export_skel_and_mesh_as_fbx_button.clicked.connect(lambda *args: self.export_fbx()) # ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ # File "C:\ProgramData/Autodesk/ApplicationPlugins\rrm3\Contents\scripts\gui\main_tabs_export_rig.py", line 288, in export_fbx # fbx_export.export_skeleton_and_mesh(rig=rig, mesh_grp=mesh_grp, file_path=file_path) # File "C:\ProgramData/Autodesk/ApplicationPlugins\rrm3\Contents\scripts\control_rig\rig_post_build\fbx_export.py", line 24, in export_skeleton_and_mesh # detach_skeleton_from_rig(rig=rig_dag.name()) # File "C:\ProgramData/Autodesk/ApplicationPlugins\rrm3\Contents\scripts\control_rig\rig_post_build\fbx_export.py", line 168, in detach_skeleton_from_rig # cmds.disconnectAttr(f'{rig}.rrmSHJoint', f'{jnt}.rrmSHJoint') # RuntimeError: There is no connection from 'controlRig.rrmSHJoint' to 'Tail_01_08_SH_Jnt.rrmSHJoint' to disconnect

all i have is the issue of redshift maya complaining about not being found despite not using it. I was using it for another project im no longer using it. that is the only thing that comes up. I also was loading into the mesh group, and controlrig into the rig field and export skeleton as mesh to fbx. no actual animations are present.

now i have the problem with the hound model where I select the mesh group, and the control rig and export through the export tab and it doesn't do anything.

would seem not. lol. didn't even dawn on me there was a export tab. lol. live and learn.

dustin? you around? can you elaborate on what I need to do in order to create a single eye with eye lid?

unreal 5.5 is released. :) let me know how things go on your assessment. do you have a direct link on how to incorporate quadrepedal rig set up? I am going to be creating a quadrepedal creature for my game project, just want to know the best approach to do when designing it so when I use RRm3 it is a simple process. :) thanks. keep up the great work.

I understand this might be viewed more as nitpicking but it would be more ideal if I myself as the rigger could export it and save all the controls, bones, parenting etc intact as a separate file without the "editing ability" intact of RRM3 but still be able to functionally do their job without the inconvenience of downloading a plug in to be able to view the rig properly. It feels like it adds a layer of complication for the animator when they have to go download something to make it work when a rigger who didn't use RRM3, instead made their own and the animator can use it right out the gate. I love RRM3 i think it has major promise and so far its been rather useful as I been using RRM since 2.x . But the licensing hassle and trying to make it set up so an animator can do their work without being troubled with needless busy work/extra steps is the only frustrating aspect of this plug in. The licensing definitely complicates things. This is in fact the issue we are having in our project to get things done efficiently. hopefully something can be done in the future so as a rigger I can just export on my end so an animator doesn't have to be troubled with installing anything. Perhaps embed that functionality of that plug in into the RRM3 plug in so I can export my rig so the animator can use it without needing RRM3?

I agree. this has always bothered me a bit. It should be able to be exported as a fully compatible rig to the other animation artist rather than needing to own his/her own license of RRM3. It shoehorns and forces usership artificially and not in a good way. For a studio I guess a studio might make sense where say 10 rigging artists need standardization. That's fine. However as an rigging artist say in an indie start up,(which I am now) or as a small shoe string budget group who wants to make a game, shouldn't be required to own 2, 3, or more licenses when there is only one rigging artist ( such as me for example). When it can be exported; such as the controls, constraints, components and parenting should propagate perfectly compatible exported ma/mb file for the artist to animate without need for another license (RRM3 uses internal maya tools and logic to display and function as intended). It is a unnecessary step. If I own the license, that should be suffice, the animation artist I am handing it off to animate while i do the next rig shouldn't be required to own the license as well. No one is going to pass off the RRM3 as a "their rig tool", As DxMx said, I did the actual work using an automation tool no different than advanced skeleton or Mgear for example. they don't own my "work" Think of it this way? It is no different than Stanley not owning the hammer I bought from them to hammer a nail into wood to build a small table. If someone needs the hammer I literally hand them the hammer to use. I could buy 2 hammers, but why do that when I already have one. In this case I paid X amount of money on RRM3 tool to help automate and expedite the process of rigging. I can should be to do as I please within the confines of game development as long as I am not reselling RRM3 tool itself. I think using the "imposter" argument is fear mongering and is an inaccurate and disingenuous of how the tool would get abused. A person can just buy it and hand it off to other animation artists and completely circumvent the need for buying another license. I don't condone that, however I can see how someone might given the distaste of having to buy multiple licenses when it should just be exported as a compatible rig for an animation artist who will not have any rigging responsibilities whatsoever, so that ends up being money wasted. I like the tool, so far it's proven useful. I have used since 2.x days from creativecrash. Yes, its a wee bit buggy at times, and there are bug fixes that come in a timely manner and so far I haven't ran into any real significant issues. but yeah this makes me wonder if I should just go with Advanced skeleton or Mgear given the obstacles of owning multiple licenses create. This is a mature, and healthy discussion to have among the users/customer base.

it worked this time. weird. brought a new scene, and model into maya, and created a quadraped template. odd.

furhter thing to note. i went to an prior rig I made of a character. pressed quadraped template and it worked in that file. but not my hound file. not sure what is up with that. thoughts?

fair enough. yeah seems speaking to the animator they will work with Y up with the new models, and export as Zup for the existing models. so kind of works out in the end.

is there a potential for teams that prefer to work in Z up and have that option to be deployable? but as you mentioned, is if it will work properly. thoughts?

can you screenshot an example of that?? So i can see what the results are? But yeah I specified in the animation channel about dealing with just exporting as Z up as Most studios use Y up. I know in the 8 years I have rigged and animated I always used Y up and exported based on what UNity or Unreal needs. But I think its just the two pre-existing character models of the game that were oriented in Z up originally. I stated that moving forward that the new models should be oriented in Y up and exported in Z up and there shouldn't be any issues with the pre-existing animations. I know it works on my end. but it also doesn't help one of the animation artists isn't exactly versed in Unreal so that is also part of the issue as it works just fine on my end.

gotcha.I am in agreement. I found it kind of weird they use Z up by default, while nothing wrong with that but most studios work in Y up anyway and export to unreal Z up via fbx settings. so I will let them know. According to them it would be a pain to switch to Y up for mine then Z up for the others that are done already. though I am unsure who else on this team is a rigging artist besides me. But it shouldn't effect anything at tne end of it as long as the model is Z up so nothing would affect the existing animations.

here is the other issue upon opening the file on his end.

interesting. I will give that a whirl. thanks. just looked at this. :) might help with the custom rig not working in humanik. I will report back my results this weekend.

so the basically the jaw control are tied together wqith the lip controls to create a natural "opening" like in real life , but I can independently effect the lip controls separately for further manipulation on top of "opening" my jaw.

so basically place them where the top and bottom lids meet when "closed" this acts as a neutral position that drives the other controls?