I do not see where AnimationRanges can be placed in a .babylon file. Just thinking out loud, but this might a method of implementing the export of Actions in Blender, which are also named. I got 90% down the Mocap path using a .bvh, and am just making sure I am really going the right way. (Questioning myself usually happens when I stopping on something for a while, holidays)
The really big reason I went the mocap route is to try to reduce say a 2 second walk @ 120 fps to maybe 5 poses, where the frame number indicates the relative amount of time to interpolate to each pose. I have code which is starting to do that analysis. Frame based animation is not scalable, because it "performs" the animation externally (pose>>Animation>>Bake Action) & the file size just explodes. I have no intention of using it.
I know Blender had a way of actually posing skeletons on just the key frames, but until I actually started playing with inverse kinematics, posing was impossible.
I have performed tests in python & can determine which frames the poses occur in an action. I think I can @ the skeleton level:
- iterate through the actions
- get the key frames of an action
- iterate through those frames
- get the bone matrix of each bone
If going to a .babylon / BJS, just make sure every action was baked. If going to .js / QueuedInterpolation, skip the bake. Either way, both should able to get multiple animations via AnimationRanges if they can be put in a .babylon. Also, right now the animation is captured by iterating through every frame in the scene for EVERY bone. Blends with skeletal animation export very slowing. One with a 32 bone skeleton should get a 32x speed up when exporting
If you have a skeleton you are going to use in a .blend all by itself, then you could add your actions to it. You can then add those actions to any other .blend using File>>append. This separates the animation from the character.
What am I thinking that is wrong?
