it would be so much easier to work in blender if, when in solid mode,
one only saw vertices in the positive Z, like in wings, lightwave, max, etc.
my suggestions:
->hide backface verts button/hotkey
->select only frontface verts button/hotkey
wouldn’t this be awesome?
cheers,
dickie
ps, i’m not ignorant of all the kick ass features that have been added…
just curious why this has been overlooked.
I think its definitely a good idea. I know it’d speed up modeling. The border select tool is pretty slow on my machine for some reason.
Select the verts you want hidden (yellow) and hit H (hide). Alt-H or Tab to reveal.
%<
That works, but you don’t always want to spend time hiding vertices. As I said, the border select tool is slow. Also, if you hit tab, you have to REHIDE all of your vertices again. You can’t save the selection you were working on.
Oh yes you can. 
When in EDIT mode for your mesh, add new weight groups and assign different verts to relevant groups, then use the select/deselect buttons to quickly grab and manipulate/hide the verts you want.
You can also do the same with the vertex colours.
Also found a little gem when using B select tools. Middle mouse button deselects whilst left mouse button selects.
Sonix.
Hmmmmmm…but if I assign weight groups doesn’t that mean I can only select the verts in groups and not individually? The right mouse button deselects as well.
a good example would be working on a face… from some angles the nose gets real busy… eg tweaking the nostral bulb where it joins face.
you can hide the back of head,
then middle nostral verts,
then back verts of outer nostral
the other side of outer face your tweaking…(and that’s using a half head)
but then you can’t get an accurate view of changes as the mesh is hidden
ease, speed and use-ability, I would love it…
I have no idea as of how easy or hard it would be to implement, but it would befinetly be a huge bonus,
if too hard maybe hack the hide vert function to show hidden mesh semi-transparant so hidden verts are unselectable but you can still see what deformations are taking place as you manipulate the unhidden verts
also you would be able to rotate mesh and select visible verts from behind
hmmmmmm,
ok … so add another option to hide function
> display hidden verts/wireframe/solid semi transparent
with a transparency adjustment.
that would also remove the need to “tab” out of edit to view changes, and avoid the whole re-hiding verts drama.
I agree. And it’d be nice if there was a “fade out” effect on the wireframe as it gets farther away from the view point of the user. Something adjustable perhaps.
why don’t you guys agree on adding a feature like back-face culling in 3d-view port instead of talking about some weired processes.back-face culling in 3d-view is a ground-level feature common to most of the 3d-programs.it is so common to other programs that it has become unimportant…but yet is a very very necessary feature.i don’t know much programing but i guess it is quite easy to implement in blender.i would really go for it instead of adding those fancy and less important features that are being added to blender currently!
I wish it mattered what we agreed on. What we’re trying to establish is that there’s demand for certain features that seem inherently obvious. Backface culling…that would be nice. But you could accomplish the same affect by turning the clipping of your viewport way down. Right?
Yes with Weight groups you can still Grab/select/edit/move just one vert. If you don’t parent the mesh to an armature, then the weight assign functions won’t affect your mesh.
The viewport length of view is the same as the camera’s end point.
If you set the camera to 25 instead of the default 100, parts of your scene are ‘culled’ in the viewport too.
There is already a couple of threads here at elysiun with reference to backface culling and possible python script solutions, just do a search.
Sonix.
In the project I’m working on now I’ve got the problem that the viewport depth only extends to 1000. I’ve got my camera set on something like 3000 
Its a scale model of a city. One blender unit per foot.
Then the only other solution is using the Layers.
Set different sections on each layer, then just singularly display the layer for the sections you want to work on.
Sonix.
Thats possible too only you can’t have the vertices for a mesh on different layers right? If you could it’d be both interesting and confusing all at the same time. I don’t see what the big deal is about adding backface culling…of course these workarounds are easier 
Ok so what about jumping between scenes rather than Layers?
And I think I’ve had some fun playing with layered verts before.
Sonix.
I hate all this twisting around that yes you can by doing so and so then so and TADA! you’ve got some unefficient backface/vertex culling…
Of course you can always find some workaround but if it takes longer than the “real technique” then it has no sense… see what I mean?
why do:
Select face>
Add to group>
(note you must add a material)
ANd Hide
to obtain a clear working space instead of auto backface culling?
This is really a must need in modelisation… cause it sooo annoying to model complex objects such as characters with this whole cloud of points twirling around the screen…
Now, I’m not flaming anyone, just expressing myself…
%|
I hope i’ve been heard and listened to.
Ciao
dani
OF COURSE WE SHOULD HAVE BACKFACE CULLING! Yes, I am screaming. Sorry about that. But as someone stated earlier in this thread, this is something that even the most low-life sorry excuses for 3D-apps otherwise have featured since the dawn of mankind, dammit!
Hiding vertices is very good in a lot of cases. That would still be available even if backface culling was implemented. Gaaaah!
Well I’m glad that even the most normal people agree on this! It’d be nice if some of the verts disappeared! Sure its easy to hide them, but they should at least have it so that the H key toggles between hidden and unhidden so you don’t have to keep hitting alt. And when you unhide them, it selects them all…that good is that???
I also would love to have this feature. You have all suggested workarounds for this, but they don’t compare to having the real feature. It makes modeling so much easier.
There we go! One more person to support it. Perhaps we should come up with some way to document who supports what features.