You are right. User can name a collection Layer if he wants to use it as a layer. Or he can name it Group if he wants to use it as a group.
I don´t think so. Just think of collections as a generic storage boxes which you can fill with pictures of the objects you want it to hold. Then you label the boxes according to content and use case.
If you think of the boxes with the pictures again, just think of every object now getting a label as well. If one object is in two collections the object gets two labels so you allways know which boxes contain pictures of this object.
You don’t understand. A layer system has specific feature set and rules that make it powerful. A REAL group system has specific rules and features that make them fast and great for grouping complex scenes and quickly selecting them in 3D view and manipulate with them.
Don’t get me wrong, collections are a step forward but right now they don’t have the advantages of either system. They’ve hit their ceiling considerring the scene organizing.
We have a layer system dedicated to render with view layers.
Operations you are doing inside this viewlayer on a collection are also available at basic level of an object and sometimes at level of a shader.
Guys, trust people working on architectural or urban planning projects when it comes to scene organization, no one will require more powerful and bullet-proof system.
Collections, as they are envisioned at this moment, are a sub-quality feature.
My gripe with the current system is that I have the feeling it is coming from a academic viewpoint, not a production workflow viewpoint.
Combining groups and layers for several purposes at once is waiting for it to fail during production.
Also having an object in multiple collections can only work for rendering purposes imho.
And having collections ALSO as a base for e.g. instancing is also debatable as a workflow.
It’s Blender being Blender again, and not looking how other 3D apps are doing this stuff.
Coming from a long list of 3D apps over the years, imho most of the basics are there, but the execution fails.
There’s nothing wrong with groups or subsets for ‘packing’ objects, and Collections should be used ONLY for rendering and viewing purposes. This is the way all other app do it, with a separate distinction of purpose.
Having some of the group and layer functionality merged into one is just wrong.
Also, with the non-hierarchy in a Collection, large projects will become production hell.
And to answer the workflow question:
You build your stuff, and organize all this into ‘null’ based hierarchies that will make sense for the project.
e.g.in a archviz project you could have ‘ground floor’, ‘first floor’, ‘interior’ etc., all nicely separated with empty ‘null’ objects.
For e.g. scattering or extra shading purposes you could create groups, which contain a subset of objects.
For the final rendering & comping setup, you create separate sets of ‘scene-nodes’, with render settings and overrides.
Maya, Softimage, Houdini, C4D, 3DSMax etc. all work this way. It’s clean, simple to bug fix, and easy to pick up in another application.
In Blender, for now it’s a bit of a mess which confuses the shizzle out of people.
my € 0.02
I really want to trust you but give me a clear example where the new collection will fail in organizing a project.
Not just organizing - manipulating in a fast and clear way. If you didn’t have a requirement for a fast and really complex scene or ever been in contact with architect’s work it my be difficult and time consuming to explain. I did say ‘trust’, didn’t i
However, for starters, do click and read the link i posted few posts up.
Just spend some time to look at the various other apps to see how things could be done.
It’s not just architecture, large scale projects NEED a proper organizing tool. For now, it;s not there yet.
IMO, it is not collection idea that fails but just the outliner views.
The same way, that X-ray was not sufficient to remove wireframe mode.
I think that nobody wants a default outliner view without collapsed hierarchies.
If people are confusing viewlayer view with a collections view, we probably should have addtition/removal of objects to collection restricted to a collections view and a solo collection display for this viewlayer view. You click on a collection, all the others are collapsed and hierarchies inside collection are displayed (with a link to another collection for children outside of collection).
I read the link and you posted the comment in May. Many things have changed since then and some of your request was out of scope.
Neither layers nor groups in Blender handle parenting and transforms, and collections won’t either.
I would like if possible to see a video demonstrating how LW handle the groups.
Just to make it clear i m not the type of Blender user who will argue because he believes that Blender is the Best, I m honestly asking to know since, i don’t know how others handle those features.
This is where we, as Blender community, fail. Stop talking about matter that will make Blender better, it is sad end of story
I think this is the story of most OSS applications, design by committee , but not listening to the users more often.
For what it’s worth, I think it’s awesome Blender has been doing so well over the years.
But it has to stop enclosing itself in a self-containing bubble that often makes no sense looking at ‘industry standards’.
But to end on a more positive note: Award stuff
Why? You could for example, in your main collection make zwo sub collections - one “Layers” and one “Groups”. Then put all Collections you use as Layer types in to the Layers Collection and all the Group type collections into the Group Collection.
Now you have them nicely separated and can even easily adress all of one type at once with Python.
But there can be hierarchies in Collections? Wat do you mean?
Hmm… can you explain which of theses steps is impossible or tedious with the collections in 2.80?
Just to illustrate, sorry for the long post:
Let’s say you are modeling a large residential building. But not just modeling, you are ‘sketching’ it in different variants in early phases of a project and modifying it according to remarks in later phases.
Blender with its fast material and rendering system is a good pick for the job. Also, you are organizing your scene in such a way it is resistant to later editing, which always happen - there has to be a fast way to change eg. the floor organization, shape and distribution of openings, types of openings, dimensions of columns etc.
You will probably have separated layers (in 2.8 forced to collections) for streets, grass patches, trees (useful to turn off while modeling), vehicles, people, streetware and other accessories, then building walls, floors, openings, visible furniture etc. Probably you will end up with up to 30 or 40 of them, on a click-able, comprehensible list (outliner).
You will most probably (as it is always with residential buildings) have a lot of windows. Up to a couple of hundreds sometimes. And they are all on a separated layer called eg. ‘windows’ (believe or not, i’m simplifying it here). Now a trick with a window is that it is usually comprised of some editing-prone sub objects - a frame (can change in color and thickness), a glass (color, reflectiveness), a blind (present / not present), an interior and exterior bench (material, overhang), a parapet railing (present / not present). I just can not have my window combined into one mesh, while i do want to be able to select it with one click in the 3d view. And - you can have a lot of repeating windows (instances) and a lot of unique ones. You are guessing i am in the need of groups here (in 2.8 forced to collections). Some windows share dimensions, but often - all windows share the frame type or bench overhang.
I would very likely want to be able to quickly select a couple of windows in a vertical row (in 3D view of course, without the need to scroll through a thousand of names in the outliner, looking for a name of a duplicated window i do not know, or searching for a parent object for each one in 3D view) and move them for adjustment, or i might enter an instanced group (enter the closest window to where i currently am, not looking for an ‘original’ of all instances somewhere in my scene). I find the row of instanced windows, i enter the nearest one, and change the type of the window frame (because client gave up on the more expensive ones which fell victim to the facade brick price). In this process i would very much like for my windows to be selectable as one object for fast distribution tweaks, comprised of multiple separated sub-objects for fast type - varying, which i can access in any of the instanced windows and would be followed in all instances… If i am to scavenge through thousands of generic names in the outliner to select four windows, look for my instances original, making unique windows by ‘making them real’… i am at at one fifth of my required speed. And i do want access to my layers in a list that is not comprised of thousand of entries - having to quickly turn some of them on and off while working. One look at a comprehensible list, shoot and run.
You can clearly see there are two different, distinct systems at work here and it is what 99% of dcc aps realized. Guys, even Inkscape has differentiated layers and groups.
So if you would have organized your windows into:
Main Collection -> Groups Collections -> Residential Buildings -> Windows -> Windows TypeA
Then you would navigate to this Collection and hit “select Objects”
Or even easier, you select your WindowA hit shift-G -> collections -> “Windows Type A”
If you want to select the parent you hit a shift-G -> parent
I am then forced to revert my eyesight from the 3D view and paradigm to a’list’ / logic paradigm and plow through a 5 levels of hierarchy as often as i need to select something to tweak it’s position, while giving a name to all subcategories of my building elements.
A simple click and select in 3D view for objects and groups, ‘list mode’ only for layers - a couple times in ten minutes. Quite simple, you have to admit.
By reverting your eysight from 3d view to list do you mean the list you get when you hit ctrl-g -> collections?
Personally I prefer that to other systems where grouped objects are treated as one entity unless you “open” the group like in 3ds max. Having to do an extra step if I want to access an object by itself is pretty annoying in my opinion. Hence I never used groups in 3ds Max.
Anyway, in which scenario do you have to scroll through thousands and thousands of objects?