Link as Collection, Object, ...?

Hi there,

to create an own asset library, I read somewhere (unfortunately cannot find it anymore) that one should always provide a collection to link to. Unfortunately, when I try it like this, as an example:

and then try to link to the collection of cube1, I get this:

The pivot point of the linked collection is not in the middle of the cube, but relative to where the cube was to the origin in the library! How can I change that, right now I have to put all my assets to the origin, one over another, or make one library file per asset!
Then I saw this tutorial ( in which the author links to Objects instead of Collections. However, when I do that, I cannot move the assets in my scene.

So, what is the recommended way to create and use an asset library?

Thanks to everyone!

Although I’m clueless about what’s the proper way, have you tried making a proxy out of the linked object? The original will move around as you move the proxy, but you can hide it I think.

I’m a bit reluctant on updating everything of mine until I see how the upcoming overrides system will work.

Although I hated it first because nothing I had worked as expected, the idea of having world origo as “block insert point” has kind of grown on me, given that a collection doesn’t have a origin property. Yes, that probably involves moving everything and getting rid of a now unusable parent empty, but…

I know proxies only from using them on rigs in order to animate a character from another file.
I would not want the original to move around in the library file when I move the proxy in my scene file, though.

Yes, the problem is that the collection does not have any own position, causing the problem in the screenshots.

Right now I have two bad solutions, both using collections because objects cannot be moved around:

  1. Have a library file with every asset one over the other on the origin.
  2. Have one library file per asset.

Yeah. The first one sounds better to me. It kinda makes sense to have assets grouped under subassets for a library file, right? Then you realize… Thumbnails?

So I’m curious to see where the asset manager is going.

So you mean the “right” way to do this would be to have all assets one over the other, but differentiate them via their thumbnails?
I would really like someone to shed some light on this topic here… :frowning:

Hey, I am trying to adapt to “proxy system” that Blender provides and I am also having a bit of dificulties. There is actually not that much info about how exactly this system works but from most sources it looks that link collections (link groups in 2.79) is the best way.
First of all I don’t think that making asset library is the best thing about this system. Best about this (and using proxy system in general) is that you can save up HUGE loads of memory and so it is almost mandatory when you are working on big projects with a lots of same objects (trees, grass, etc.). And as for that the best solution in Blender seems to be linked collections (is quite close to for example V-ray proxy solution)

So In Blender you can do this :
Instead of append you can link object from other blend file and bring proxy image of source file to another file. As you pointed out for some reason you cannot move such linked object at the moment and only workaround I found is that when you duplicate this linked object (shift+D) then these duplicates can be moved, scaled, etc. So it kinda works.

You can duplicate objects in your scene and then linked them(or check link while shift+D them) so they will share same object data and so they don’t eat up that much memory. This is somewhat similar to linked objects except you dont link them from another file.

And last one that I am aware of is just that linked collection. So you make collection of objects and then you linked them as one proxy that can be scaled, moved, particled, etc. This one is what I was looking for but for that ugly bug you mentioned :frowning: Or is it a bug? I do not know but sure as hell the problem is with that origin you cannot set right (or set at all). Without that I cannot use it and so I am trying to dig somewhere if that can be or will be solved somehow.

There is also something called “static overrides” and that should be new proxy system for Blender, but it has been postponed and I haven’t found any recent info about it’s status.

There is a gif of mentioned problem :

Few days ago, manual origin setting has been impleneted to daily builds so you can actually move origin now. I was hoping that this would solve the problem with linked collections but unfortunately moving origin doesn’t work on linked collections either :(. Does anyone know any workaround ?

Guys, this is based on the collection’s origin.
Put the collection in an isolated scene, such as an “assets scene”, then reset the location of the collection with (alt g on OSX but I think the windows key is different like control or something)
Anyway make sure the collection is at 0,0,0, if it’s a single object that means the object’s origin should be at 0,0,0

Then when you add (shift a) the collection instance, it will be added centered.

In other words, right now, if you go to the original collection (not the instance) you will see the orange origin dot is exactly as offset as the issue you are having.

Maybe I am not understanding correctly, but the collection does not have any location, right? Just like a layer in Blender 2.79 it is just a collection of objects, and only the objects have locations.
At least I cannot see any collection location…

Please observe the origin points in the following screencaptures.
Things to note:
a) What scene it is
b) Which object is instanced
c) The name of the object

As you said, it’s a bunch of objects grouped together. When creating an instance of it in another scene, where is the origin of the new ‘single’ collection instance? One idea may have been to use the average point between the origins, but instead it is the raw offset from (0,0,0)
You can’t really discuss or argue with the machine.

As an aside, I don’t like this either. My reason is that when creating an assets scene, all the darn things overlap!!! I don’t really care ‘why’ either, I want to move the origin. Them’s the breaks :frowning:

Ok, we have the same understanding of the situation, thanks for making the effort to illustrate.
Just in case there was a misunderstanding: In my original example those three cubes were supposed to be three different assets all neatly ligned up one beside the other for a good overview. But of course, linking to them is a mess then. :frowning:

1 Like

Hey just a bit of an update, they seems to have unlocked library overrides (proxy system). Gonna check this out but for first sight it looks promising.