Oh... now I see. Two concatenated two-bone IK constraints! How didn't I realized that before? :p Every time I wanted to use IKs to make a walking animation I failed miserably because one part of the leg was getting stretched and didn't followed the rest of the bone structure, but this allows for that. It's golden!
I still don't understand why my transform constraints aren't working, but this will help me a lot at not needing them at all. Well, I still need to rotate the feet bones so they look like they should when walking or kneeling (like in this case here), but that's pretty simple to add.
So a big thank you for you, Erikari! :clap:
Ok, this wasn't so easy as in the Raptor example. I've created two concatenated IK2-bone constraints but the lower one didn't work at all (it didn't have much influence over its bones).
After a LOT of experimenting I've come to the conclusion that if you create those IKs when you also have other constraints in those bones, even when they're set to 0% influence, something bad happens behind the scenes and the new IK doesn't work as expected.
This could also explain why that transform constraint from the original post didn't work as well. I don't know if this is a bug or not, but I'm making sure from now on to use as less constraints as possible, which will not be difficult thanks to the suggestion of Erikari of using IKs as in the raptor example. 🙂
Thinking about it... I'm pretty sure that the problem here is that all those IK and transform constraints fought between them to have any influence over the translate coordinates.
But I expected that those constraints that had a 0% mix/influence would take no part in that "fight", and I think that is not the case, right? I mean, as long as you setup a constraint the program will assume it's set to 100% influence to determine how they will behave between them?
Could I have any confirmation of this from the egg heads? 😃
