Help: Having problems with shadows.

Dave R

I'm unsure as to when groups versus components (or in what instances I've used them in the model). Is there an easy way to tell and to make replacements as appropriate?

Best,
Todd

I saw in another post that you are planning to draw cabinets and intend to make exploded views of them. The model you posted is nothing but groups and nested groups. I would use components instead of groups. For my work I've never found a case where a group made more sense than a component. Not everyone feels that way so you'll get differing opinions.

By using components you gain all sorts of benefits in efficiency and ease of work that you don't get with groups.

As to converting groups to components, Box has you covered. You might find a little plugin by Rick Wilson to be useful, too. It's called ApplyTo and is available at Smustard.com. You'd still have to go through and make components of the groups but then you can apply the definition of one component to the others.

Box

@dave r said:

By using components you gain all sorts of benefits in efficiency and ease of work that you don't get with ~~components~~ groups.

As to converting groups to components, ~~Box~~ Mac1 has you covered.

B+
Dave is improving but must try harder.

Dave R

I fixed it. My excuse is that it's way too early to be awake on a Sunday morning and my coffee hadn't kicked in yet.

mac1

there used to be a plugin wherein one could convert say like 100 separate groups (same entity) to 100 separate components and then a batch replacement of that 100 could be done with 1 component.
does anyone know where that is now. That resulted in a few key clicks to replace the same 100 groups with 1 component definition?

Dave R

Maybe ThomThom's Groups to Components?

Of course the easiest thing is to start out building the model correctly so you don't have to go back and fix it.

mac1

I have not seen 1 piece of info that establishes in a quantitate way differences only some general statements. I usually use the philosophy that better is the detriment of good enough. Although not the best approach I would not make any major changes to the op model until such time it is known there is a problem with it especially now since they will not be able to load it into Google earth and meet their criteria?

cotty

@dave r said:

Maybe ThomThom's Groups to Components?

Of course the easiest thing is to start out building the model correctly so you don't have to go back and fix it.

Or if you didn't change the copied groups, you can convert them all to instances of one component with the "convert into components" tools of Thomthoms Selection Toys with one click ...

mac1

FYI for all comparing the stats for OPs orginal model and one where the quadrant fence on the left and right of the house was changed to components;

[*case 1 op orginal5.84mb]
edges 47568
fCES 19119
COMP INST 62
GUIDES 4
groups 444
comp def 16
layers 4
materials 17
styles 1

[case 2 quadrant fence left and right of house to components 5.9mb]
edges 47568
faces 19117
comp inst 334
guides 4
groups 140
comp def 27
layers 4
materials 17
styles 1

panixia

@cotty said:

if you didn't change the copied groups, you can convert them all to instances of one component with the "convert into components" tools of Thomthoms Selection Toys with one click ...

this is the ultimate "doh! moment"

mac1

when you convert a large group to single components you then have a number of components with different names( usually numbered) and if you know all of those are the same use the component browser replace capability to then replace selected.
Nothing new been around for years.