"Hide Rest of Model" component Edit Wish
-
Okay. . smartie pantses. . .I do use layers and I do use Hide rest of model, but it's an all or nothing thing and layers require going back and forth thru the layer menu and such. IT would just seem to me to be more "convenient" if you will to have visibility of nested objects appear or disappear up or down the tree. do ya'Falla?
-
I do, David, I do...
The hide rest of model function is very handy but it's an "all or nothing" solution at the time and often you need someof the context but not all the model. That is it, truly. -
Hi folks.
You can use a scene to memorise the layers on/off properties.
Then, it is only one click on a scene tab to set the layers in one go instead of going in the layer menu and clicking a lot of them.
Just ideas.
-
Yes, Jean but you cannot set up scenes for every possible modelling scenario! I use those scenes and often combine them with hide rest of model and layer visibility but you cannot spend more time by setting up a whole bunch of scenes than modelling itself!
-
@unknownuser said:
That is it, truly.
Well fix it Dang it!!!
No seriously. . .even though everyone has a work flow that either works or not works with the situation as it is, For ME i would think a ruby to do this would be awesome, but alas and Alack. . .I am not skilled in the writing and testing of ruby code . . .stuff. So if any of the Ruby code Magi could take a look at this I think it would be very useful.
-
Well, it seems there is nothing to "fix" as it is not a bug but there would be nice to have a feature like that.
-
how about this: make a keyboard shortcut for invert selection, hide and, unhide last. now select your parent group, hit your invert selected shortcut then your hide short cut, do your edit then hit your unhide all shortcut.
if you have some hidden not hidden you want to remember you could create a page first then use that to restore temporary hidden things instead of using unhide last. -
Hmmm. That's not bad. I have the shortcuts already. I will try that.
Thanks. . . .
BUT SOMEONE STLL THINK ABOUT THE RUBY!!!!
@unknownuser said:
Well, it seems there is nothing to "fix" as it is not a bug but there would be nice to have a feature like that.
Well that is what I meant. . ..golly! -
Sounds like a good idea to me, as I run into this a lot, and I use extensive layering and nested groups/comps. I keep hiding/unhiding ("H" key shortcut} but like said, I need to see some parts, even if shaded, visible as reference during my drawing operations.
David, you need to put this thread or the initial idea on the "suggestions" thread.
My only concern is how would you control the visibility?
-
I didn't really know where the best place to post this. .. so if it is in the wrong place, mea culpa. . .
As far as visibility options go in this "fantasy ruby" that I am imagining. . ..I would think that when you are in a complex nested window component, for instance you could right click on it and a flag would say, "Show Parent" or "Hide Parent" or toggle by keystroke . .. I dunno. . . just spit-ballin' here.
Oh I do hope some ruby Guru gives this a shot. . . oh I do! I do! I do! I do!
:mrgreen: -
i think the best place for this function would be to add it to thomthom selection toys maybe you could suggest it in that thread, but i do get the impression thom is busy with something amazing right now!
-
@unknownuser said:
For example. . if I have a complicated window Group that would have a tree looking like this. . .
Try my quick/dirty method:
Window Group
_____Window Frame...cntrl + C the window frame component__________Mullion (Component)
_______________Glazing etc etc. ...cntrl + V the window frame component
I could work on the Glazing and still keep the mullions and Frames visible but have the rest of the model hidden. Work with the copied comp(s). within your active comp. & delete when complete.
Thx,
David_H
David,
Above is convoluted at best....though I like the prospect of next of kin visibility ;~)Best,
Charlie -
I am not sure I follow that methodology, but that shouldn't surprise anyone!
I just need to give it a try tho. IT's probably pretty good.
Advertisement