Modifier mesh updating question

 
 
 
Posted by:havardsc
Data created:13 November 2012

I dont know if this is a defect or not, but im struggling to get the updated mesh from modifiers below my lab modifier. Say I got a mesh with a bend modifier that has some parameters animated. If I then add a lab modifier and plug the input mesh straight to the output slot, the resulting mesh is now just a snapshot of the mesh at the time the lab modifier got activated. Scrubbing the timeline does nothing to it anymore. Is this the correct behaviour?

It's not correct behaviour. We're working on it, i.e. on properly updating graphs when their incoming inputs are animated in Max.

Ivan Kolev (Software Developer, EPHERE Inc.)

E-mail: ivan.kolev at ephere dot com

Discord: ikolev

Thanks for the fast reply. A quick follow-up question: I had created another modifier and each time I moved the slider 1 frame the modifier got evaluated two times. Is this normal as well? Some subsampling or something like that?

Hm, no, this sounds strange. I'll try to reproduce it.

Ivan Kolev (Software Developer, EPHERE Inc.)

E-mail: ivan.kolev at ephere dot com

Discord: ikolev

I can try to give an example:

I have a class that samples the mesh at a given interval and stores it, effectively creating something like this for an animated object:

 

The code for the class is here: http://pastebin.com/tUQaAn18

If I remove the check "if (frame != prevframe)" I get some weird results.

Consider a box that moves along one axis in linear speed, and is sample every other frame:

 

Example 1 is where I check if the input frame is the same as the previous frame.

Example 2 is without the check. You see that example 2 samples the box more often.

Here is my modifier setup: 

 

All the input values are integers.

It might be just an error that I've made, so I tried to show my approach to it.

 

Hi again, sorry that it's been so long.

I think I've fixed the problem with duplicate modifier updates (in the next build, as usual). However, your example is a bit strange. I'm not sure I get the general idea, and I'm not sure this is the best way to implement it. If you want to create a super object which combines all frames of another object, then I think it would be better implemented as a procedural object instead of a modifier. And it will need the new features we're currently working on (evaluation of parameters at frames different from the current).

Ivan Kolev (Software Developer, EPHERE Inc.)

E-mail: ivan.kolev at ephere dot com

Discord: ikolev