Talk:Inverse kinematics

Physics Unassessed

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Vandalism

This page was vandalized with the use of weasel words but is fixed.

IK unimportant due to mocap?

Not sure the line saying IK has any less importance due to Motion capture use has any merit at all. Ask any animator or technician for game development and using mocap as a *base* for animation is far, far more common than using raw mocap for animation data. IK is in heavy use to make characters' feet line up with terrain, hands line up with usable objects etc. The line adds nothing to the article, and if anything is disinformative and lacks perspective. Up for someone proving me wrong, but i'm removing it for now.--Decept404 14:06, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Proposal

This article and Inverse kinematic animation share a number of redundant facts, and I think they're close enough in subject that they needn't be split into two separate articles.Chaos95 07:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I'm surprised there are two articles on the same subject. — Frecklefσσt | Talk 11:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I favor the merge, with IK Animation as a sub-topic within the IK article. Two entries are redundant; one would serve us all better 12.206.63.24 (talk) 20:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC) Morf[reply]

I favour the merge too. The two topics are not the same, just so closely related (see comment above) that they belong together. jujutu | Talk 16 January 2008