Grouping like Maya/Unity/etc
I would love a grouping feature like most 3d softwares have with inherited transforms. So basically this:
Select several objects Press grouping function button (ctrl+g?) Put all objects into empty object Parent transform/scale/rotation to group
If groups are not ideal, then perhaps the Parenting function could get a "Add to empty" feature?
12 Comments
You can place them in a collection, hide the collection and add an instanced collection with Shift A, it was the same workflow in 2.7x but it was called groups instead of collections.
* @rc12 * Can this produce a hierarchical tree like in maya?
* @rc12 * Do you know how to create Actions for this task with a shortcut?
* @rc12 * Thanks but...All the time wasted doing such a basic thing.
* @rc12 * it's a lot of clics for such a basic thing, updating collections with tranform options is way more productive
I'm an old 3ds max user and this drove me crazy so I created a very basic add-on that gets you 80% of the way there. It's basically a parenting macro that creates a wireframe bounding box. Okay, maybe 60% of the way there, but it's really useful.
To emulate the other behaviors a lot more work needs to be done, this is quick and dirty and it removes a lot of headaches and repetitive work. Good enough for me.
github.com/wheezardth/blender-max-groups
That is such a missing feature. It's incredible that it's not here.
I created a script to solve this exact problem recently. I'm a code noob so it's not perfect but perhaps this is helpful to people:
github.com/CombatLobster/QuickGroup/blob/master/GroupToEmpty.py
It creates an operator with a button in the Item section of the 3d view sidebar. Pressing it creates a new empty and immediately parents all selected objects to it.
I was going to say "but thats a thing already" but of course 2.8 bulldozed it along with a dozen great features. I'd suggest making this a 'revert stupid changes' thread
* @syborg64 * They seriously removed it? ffs... Do they want to be industry software or just few friends software? Get on with industry. +1 from me.
* @dariusz * Just parent what ever you need to an empty and put it in a collection. If you love your "industry software" so much, go back to slow outdated Maya. Using loose terms like this to justify your unwillingness to try a new system that is more flexible is a weak argument for change. I used Maya for many years in production and changed over to Blender about 5 years ago. Simply having something being the incumbent, or "its they way everyone does it" doesn't make that objectively better. Things, practice and work flows change all the time, without trying new things and pushing people into other workflows Blender would not have been the software it is today. I know this is a long rant, but we see these kinds of post day in day out around here.
* @zero.osellame *
but we see these kinds of post day in day out around here.Then follow the common sense of industry and add groups. My CTRL+G has just turned in to a set of actions for no apparent reason. Add groups, or make this action CTRL+G one click action. Then the posts will go away. You want blender to be industry software? You want it to grow? You wan't it to get more money to grow better? Get on with the needs of the industry. U don't want to use groups coz they "outdated". Fine, give CTRL+G equivalent, and we all good. But giving us a 5 step tutorial on how to do it is not the way. We need a hierarchically based tree system of scene data representation. Do you know how does CAD data look like? 50k objects with lots of hierarchies that NEEDS TO BE PRESERVERD. Or else you fired. So yea, as "fancy" as collections are, if a company can not reproduce the program requirements then blender won't be adapted. And trust me, a large enterprise licensing support subscription will pretty much double the income of blender foundation.