![]()
QUOTE(DoctorYo @ 11/30/07, 11:02 PM) [snapback]277309[/snapback]
A help manual is supposed to provide help to users who may not know what they are doing or what they are looking for. Maya's docs seem haphazard and incomplete, with almost no examples of how a particular feature can be used.
That only applies for simple consumer products. Mayas a framework, its not describable in these terms*. By the way i dont think the max manual succeeds in this mater any better. Your free to try to write a manual describing all you can do with maya, because its a LOT. Its like assuming photo shop manual should describe how to paint astethic images.
One thing is certain you must learn to try to read nodes as they are, because theres no one right way to use them. When i earlier in life read mathematics i was pissed about the fact that they cant describe better what you can do with mathematics (because it was self evident in primary school), but is so happens they dont because they dont KNOW it. You can literary use it for anything just as long as you can figure out a way how. So the best they could hope for is describe what they intended for its use. But off course theres hundreds of hundreds of tutorials out there that do things in some totally obscure way that was never intended to be done but can be because they left the field of problem open. So instead they teach it to you like mathematics, they describe how it works and leave the application to you. Some make it some dont (its called life), you dont need to use maya.
So the document writer should have to be genius, maybe you are ![]()
, because that person would need to document all the intended uses as well as any implication here of, and cant ask the designers because they truly dont know.
However they don't even want the art user to bother their head with this. Just because a td can do something dont mean everybody else needs to be able to do so. You choose your level, everything is never even on the plate. They made a open framework so that you can build it on top of that if you want to. When you do your on your own, they dont even attempt to hide this fact.
Let us take a very simple obscure and effective realworld use of parent constrain (or orient constrain), which is perfectly valid (i choose this one because i know you quite likely didn't know this). Instead of connecting it to other transform you connect it out form a fourByFourMatrix. this allows you to set transform by matrix computation devised by yourself thus overriding the order of solution to make a virtually transform node that for example takes in axis angles in its attributes instead of Euler rotations. And its not described anywhere because its certainly not designed to work this way. But since its allmost as effective as anything i could make in api its okay (but need to work 6 times longer). Ok so i could use angle between node nowdays.
Theres no mention of this anywhere i know of, but thats beyond the point. i can device such obscure uses for each and every node in seconds. Just listing all the uses for parent constraint ive come up to would be LONGER than the entrie manual
- its like you were trying to write a manual for c in terms do this whan you nee this, but see the c compiler obly prowdes you with lowlevel acces tos stuff everything else is juta a library
QUOTE
lol.. you mean those weren't raisins in my cornflakes.. ewwwww!
![]()
yes thats quality control for you.
PS: read the man of procmail ![]()