Timelines with multiple start/end values


#1

Suppose that I want to rotate an object between angle a and angle b in m axis. a, b and m are variables. What is the best way to go about this? There are 2 ways I know: multiple timelines with hardcoded values and using Z.every(not using timelines at all). This is related to my newest suggestion. I would like to know if there is currently a better way to do that, because the current solutions just feel like…a work around.


#2

Take a look at this link.
Time lines

Steve


#3

I already did that, it works fine for positions but not for rotations. Try doing the following: get a node and make a timeline changing its y axis rotation from 0 to 180. Everything cool right? Now do that with a start node [0.0.0] and a end node [0, 180, 0] relativeTo property and see what happens :disappointed:

EDIT

So here’s what I mean

EDIT
The position changing is irrelevant, just put [0,0,0] on zapbot, the issue is how it rotates using relativeTo.


#4

Hi Mark,
Perhaps I don’t understand what you are trying to do,
but why not animate one group (0 to 180 / Y axis ) then make Zapbot a child of this group?
Being a child, his position/rotation are relative to his parent…


#5

Suppose the value I want to rotate to can be 90, 360, whatever…it changes in the program, it’s a variable.The only elegant way to do it would be using the relativeTo solution that Steve pointed out, but as I show on the GIF, that as well only works as expected for the position transform. If you do it with the rotation it doesn’t rotate the way you’d want.

EDIT
This GIF is more straight to the point

EDIT
The relative is set to root and end, but if you set to begin and end it has the same result.


#6

Didi you try with angle between 0 and 90?
It seems there is something wrong when the angular difference is over 90°…

So, the 180° can be achieved with a third reference: 0 to 90 then 90 to 180…
A bit cumbersome. :slight_smile:


#7
Did you try with angle between 0 and 90?
It seems there is something wrong when the angular difference is over 90°…

Huh, you’re right :face_with_raised_eyebrow: Hey @sebastian could you take a look at this?