Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

If you have any questions, reports, suggestions, or requests about Live2D, please send them to this forum.
※We cannot guarantee statements or answers from Live2D staff. Thank you for your understanding in advance.
 
Live2D Cubism
Cubism Products and Downloads
Cubism product manuals and tutorials
Cubism Editor Manual    Cubism Editor Tutorial    Cubism SDK Manual    Cubism SDK Tutorial
[INFORMATION](4/25/2024)
Cubism Editor 5.1 alpha3 is now available!

We have incorporated some of your comments and suggestions. Thank you for your comments and requests!
We will continue to welcome your feedback on alpha3.

Download/ Manual and Update History
Options

Error with deformer reflection inside parent deformer

- Live2D Software Version: 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2
- OS & Version: Windows 10
- PC Model: Lenovo L340
- Graphics Specifications: GeForce GTX 1050
- CPU: Intel Core i7-9750H
- Memory: 8GB

When doing reflections on a child deformer inside a parent deformer linked to the same parameter, it appears that the child deformers are not reflected properly in Live2D 4.1 and Live2D 4.2. I leave a link to a video explaining those errors.

youtu.be/5hsC6XQpvZw

These errors were not present in Live2D 4.0 and previous versions when I tried to reproduce them. I wanted to know if this is related to the Live2D software version or is it just happening me.

For the time being, I'll keep using version 4.0.
Tagged:

Answers

  • Options
    @N6r0th

    Thank you for your continued use of our product.
    We apologize for any inconvenience caused.

    Thank you for attaching the video.
    Sorry, but the deformer is too small and difficult to understand.
    I would appreciate it if you could capture the video so that I can see it larger and clearer.

    The deformation of the deformer is large and easy to see.
    Also, please capture with the log palette visible so that it is easy to check the error log status.

    Best regards.
  • Options
    @N6r0th

    Sorry for the consecutive replies.

    We have looked into this in detail and found that we had fixed the problem with the inversion function.
    The behavior back in 4.0 was a glitch and the current behavior is the normal one.

    Best regards!
Sign In or Register to comment.