Max: Implementation of Camera Attributes Validator

[moonyuet]

Changelog Description

Implement Validate Camera Attributes in camera family in Max host

Additional info

• This validator is not eligible for the camera created from the external plugins such as Redshift and Arnold etc.
• When the values of the camera attributes in the setting set to 0, the validator would skip checking the attribute.

Testing notes:

1. Launch Max via launcher
2. Tweak the settings ayon+settings://max/publish/ValidateCameraAttributes or project_settings/max/publish/ValidateCameraAttributes
   
   
3. Create Camera Instance
4. Publish
5. If the camera attributes dont align with those attributes in the setting, the validator would error out.

[ynbot]

Task linked: OP-7075 Validate Camera Attributes

[LiborBatek]

First finding is that the Camera Attributes option in the Publisher should be named a bit differently to be more clear imho...

something like> Validate Attributes or Validate Camera Attributes which a bit loong

also when the Validator kicks in the message could be more "human readible" imho... in this case FOV value being different to 45 also not sure whats the rest of the invalid attributes atm ...kinda cluttered report with a lot of "guts" exposed

[LiborBatek]

When tested with Near and Far ranges for enviro and clipping I have been able to Publish camera successfully even with wrong values...maybe when not turned on those checkers for Show and Clip Manually ??

however next time trying publishing the Validator kicked in correctly but again the messaging could be strongly improved imho

[LiborBatek]

Not sure whats the origin of this PR but right now as we have it theres is no way to validate just a few of the values but all together.... theres no way to selectively choose what to validate or at least to disable particular value?

Maybe would be option to use 0 Value to disable each entry? Something like validating against zero means skip this value in validation ??

For example:

when Focal Length been set to 0 ....then the Validate might skip this entry
also meaning that each entry does need some legit value besides zero to validate something like

Near Range must have value at least like 0.001 or similar.

Does it make sense this proposal or not?? thx

[moonyuet]

Not sure whats the origin of this PR but right now as we have it theres is no way to validate just a few of the values but all together.... theres no way to selectively choose what to validate or at least to disable particular value?

Maybe would be option to use 0 Value to disable each entry? Something like validating against zero means skip this value in validation ??

the initial purpose of this PR is to build the Camera Attributes validator in Max which is similar to Maya. But the Maya one is more hard-coded and I am not sure it will be good idea for Max(That's why you see all the settings!). But I agree with you that we can just skip the check when the parameter set to zero

[LiborBatek]

Im getting validate errors even when my values set on the camera matches the validator....

When I remove the Camera Instance and recreate it from scratch it suddenly works as expected and validate correctly.

[moonyuet]

@LiborBatek I have updated the commit and the changelog.
The validation should check if the camera attributes aligning with the settings.
You may find the video below helpful.

camera_attributes_validator.mp4

Do you think that it's also good idea to add repair action for the camera attributes?

[LiborBatek]

Do you think that it's also good idea to add repair action for the camera attributes?

Yeah would be nice! ...Did u manage to incorporate those zero values for skipping the validation or not yet?

[moonyuet]

Yeah would be nice!

Okay I will add it into the next commit

.Did u manage to incorporate those zero values for skipping the validation or not yet?

Yes, it was already there in the updated commit.

[LiborBatek]

I have tested all sort of combinations of values used for validation and my findings so far being:

• Repair Func works as expected
• Validators set to 0 arent taken into account as expected
• Values used for validation being in generic units which is ok but will give different value after Repair action if users scene being in different unit system - if switched later afterwards the values matches properly.
• *Entering values for Near Range: 0.1 and Far Range: 999.5 wont pass Validate but 1 and 1000 yes.

*I mean in an occasion that the repair did fill in correct values and they are matching in theory...still wont pass in first example.

So there are 2 issues now, question being if we should take into account Scene Units or just note it in the OP Settings via docstring that those Values being in generic units and some conversion gonna happen if not using the same.

The Validation issue seems tied to the numbers format and invalid logic for decimal values?? Now just guessing tho.

[moonyuet]

So there are 2 issues now, question being if we should take into account Scene Units or just note it in the OP Settings via docstring that those Values being in generic units and some conversion gonna happen if not using the same.

Yes I think we can mention that those default values are being in generic units in both settings and validators, so that the user can change the value as their own default in regard to what they set in scene units. (we can possibly add one more check on the scene units to give this message too)

The Validation issue seems tied to the numbers format and invalid logic for decimal values?? Now just guessing tho.

I need to double check, it is supposed that it tied to the float format. EDIT: yes, i will fix in the next commit.

[LiborBatek]

Now it all works fine! Even when having values for validating like

0.1 and 999.5

Repair function also works as expected and when using zero value in the OP Settings it correctly ignores / skip Validation.

[mkolar]

Looks good for merge. @moonyuet port to ayon pls

[moonyuet]

Looks good for merge. @moonyuet port to ayon pls

Already ported to ayon-core!