Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Hello, been a long time.
So I have a group of layer consisting of both the right and left blink layers named and auto-tagged by Ch correctly.
I add a triger to the parent layer (consisting the two layers of blink), but when I trigger it, it won't show up. However when I remove the tag, the trigger worked just fine.
- Puppet
-- Head
--- Blink
---- Right Blink
---- Left Blink
However, in my previous puppet (because this is my new design puppet), I could do it just fine, even without removing the right & left blink tag.
The only difference is the structure, which is:
- Puppet
-- Default Direction
--- Head
---- Frontal Profile
----- Eye
------ Blink
The sctructure is much deeper.
Is this a bug or what? And how do I fix it in my current, mostly acceptable, structure?
Please help me. Thanks!
Yeah. I recognised that as well last night. I was putting both blink in a same group, thus hiding one and showing the other. Therefore I seperated them and make a duplicate without a tag. Therefore I group is for autoblink, and the other is for manual trigger.
I fixed the problem with an alternative way.
Thanks for responding Alank!
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
You can look at the Auto Blink behavior and expand the handles section to see which layers it has bound to. Sometimes it does not find the layer like you expected.
The other thing to remember is the Left Blink and Right Blink tag's work by hiding all the siblings under the same parent. So I normally have Left Eye with the first child being Left Blink, and Right Eye with the first child as Right Blink. If you put the left/right blink layers off in a blink group then autoblink won't hide the other layers in the eye for you.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Yeah. I recognised that as well last night. I was putting both blink in a same group, thus hiding one and showing the other. Therefore I seperated them and make a duplicate without a tag. Therefore I group is for autoblink, and the other is for manual trigger.
I fixed the problem with an alternative way.
Thanks for responding Alank!