Comments on: Tutorial on using the Blender Physics system

By: Zach

Zach — Sun, 01 Jun 2008 05:09:20 +0000

@Ghost_Train

I had the same problem on pretty much same system, and it was being caused by the can (or whatever object) slightly overlapping with it's containing cube. Because it was parented, it would follow the bounds and it would still be overlapping. Try scaling the inside object (can) a bit smaller. It worked for me.

By: Frizmer

Frizmer — Fri, 30 May 2008 02:55:56 +0000

I`m sorry, but I can`t help comment on this.
First of all I`d like to thank the initial poster for sharing his idea, although it is not a correct way to utilize the GE, it started this discussion that brought about simple facts that might help both himself and others (including myself)on how to use it. I think it`s the sharing of ideas that is the strongest asset we Blenderheads have. I do however agree with Vilda that there should be some kind of quality filter on the tutorials posted here. This posting does imo belong on the blenderartists forum and not here. One way to implement this would maybe be to put all things like these through some filtering on that site and then either voted on or picked out by people that have the skills as a useful tutorial. Also I`m rather opposed to using Commercial Software in the pipeline for a blendertutorial, since the fact that Blender is Open Source Software and in that sense an equal opportunites kinda thingamajig. I sure as donkeypoo ain`t going to get hold of a copy of Premiere *rolls eyes and looks at his mothinfested wallet* to finish a tutorial. *wanders off while mumbling incoherent words about himself having used lowres meshes to try simplify physics calculations*

By: Alexander Ewering

Alexander Ewering — Tue, 27 May 2008 08:56:16 +0000

Rakunko: You didn't get my point. I do not have any problem with tutorials targetting beginners, I needed those myself back on IRIX when I started with Blender. But this tutorial is WRONG and does not HELP beginners, but shows them W R O N G tactics to do things. It's like opening a walnut with a hammer, and breaking half the stuff inside along the way (because the can doesn't even touch the plane it rolls down, and animation speed changes are done using Premiere).

By: Rakunko

Rakunko — Mon, 26 May 2008 21:20:16 +0000

@all
i'd like to make a valid point about blender and blendernation
blender (let alone 3D in general) is a hard concept and program to master there arent too many people that are masters of blender also the ones i do know are MPAN3 and the creators of blenderNation blender nation isnt about feeding the 'elite' users the news and best links blender nation is a neutral platform for everything blender rather it be a tut or otherwise, i think blendernation is doing a incredible job in displaying blender as a community, and anyways its always good to review the basics ^^
also making tuts are hard as hell itried making one it really didnt work out i prefer to teach what i know on hands nice work blenderNation and tut maker
also
@alexander
blender isnt the most detailed documented program out there even with the books there is so much out there yet to be discovered, in my opinion its best to discover for your self and tell others remember blender is open source and is in the ring to go the rounds with the big boys

By: Alexander Ewering

Alexander Ewering — Mon, 26 May 2008 19:55:26 +0000

If everything that's randomly 'discovered' in Blender justifies a tutorial, then we definitely have a documentation problem.

By: Statik

Statik — Mon, 26 May 2008 09:17:15 +0000

Perhaps if the tutorials were 'released' on the blenderartists forums first? That way all of these comments could be done in semi-private instead of these little bash-fests that have become popular. Then, if they survive the forums they can be linked, improved and linked or slowly fade away.

I haven't even looked at the tutorial so I can't comment on it but I can make a couple of general comments:

1, if everyone who 'discovered' a way of doing something in Blender made a tutorial of it, we would have a much larger tutorial base.
2. Having more than one way of doing something is always better. Sometimes you need a nail, sometimes you need a screw, sometimes you need glue. Maybe you can't imagine a place where this technique would be better, but I can almost guarantee that someday you'll hit a situation where this technique will help you solve a problem. Maybe not in this form, but somehow. Thats how life works.

Thanks to those who take the time to make tutorials.

Statik

By: konrad_ha

konrad_ha — Mon, 26 May 2008 08:49:26 +0000

The comments criticizing this tutorial had valid points and were written in a friendly and factual tone, so there really shouldn't be any problem with them.

Just like Alex Ewering said, constructive criticism must be allowed.

By: Alexander Ewering

Alexander Ewering — Mon, 26 May 2008 05:13:08 +0000

emc_deux: I don't have time nor the motivation to write tutorials, however, telling him how to improve it is exactly what I did.

Jeremiah: The basic flaw in your tutorial is that it is not needed - i.e., the whole technique is superfluous. The "Bounds" option does exactly what you do with parenting - it "emulates" a "virtual" object around your real object, used for collision detection.
I'm not aware of a way to change the framerate of the simulation directly, however, it is enough to simply correctly scale your scene (1 meter = 1 Blender Unit), or alternatively, you could obviously just scale the resulting IPOs in the X axis. It's just that the way you did things clearly show that you shouldn't have written a tutorial yet. I and others appreciate your work and will to give stuff to a community, but in this case, you're just teaching how to do stuff the hard way.

It MUST be allowed to express constructive criticism, and I will continue to do so.

By: Tim F

Tim F — Mon, 26 May 2008 01:15:38 +0000

Tony,

New book, that's exiting!. Any chance of catching up with you at SIG this year?

By: Tony

Tony — Mon, 26 May 2008 00:26:01 +0000

"and throw the rigid object all over the place in every wrong direction."

It doesn't, unless you make it do that. One way to make it do that is to have collision objects overlapping in space when you start the simulation, another way is to fiddle with the scale after you've already set the bounds without updating the bounds to suit the new scale.

Thanks, Jeremiah, for the nice introductory tutorial. There are a few things I would have done a little differently, and (shameless plug) people interested in those things might want to check out my upcoming book, which features a fairly big full chapter all about exactly this kind of stuff. I'll announce that as soon as it hits the shelves, which should be in a couple weeks.