In a bone layer, I have many vector layers bound to bones via the Bind Layer Tool tool.
Is there a way for me to place a GROUP layer in the bone layer and move some of those vector layers into the group layer, and still have the bones manipulate those vector layers?
I would love to organize my layers like that. But when I try it, the vector layers stop moving with the bones.
I asked this question a few years ago and the answer was no. But there is now a new-ish version of ASP and many scripts have been written since then, and sometimes people come up with clever work-arounds, so I thought I'd re-ask the question.
I know that a bone can move a group layer - that's not what I mean.
For example, I want to name a group layer "Right Arm" and put a lot of vector layers in it, with each vector layer attached to a different arm bone, and still have those layers move with the bones they were originally bound to.
Is the answer still no?
Vector Layers in a Group Layer in a Bone Layer won't move
Moderators: Víctor Paredes, Belgarath, slowtiger
I just tested your idea Genete, and a bone layer within a bone layer is pretty close to a solution.
The problem, though, is that I would need 4 or so bone layers: one for the left arm, one for the right arm, etc., and that would slow down the animation process. For example, I would have to select the "right leg" bone layer before I could move it. Then I would have to select the "left leg" bone layer before I could move it.
I really like using the bone tools without having to select different layers. It's fast and elegant.
Thanks for the idea, though. I might yet employ it.
So...is there no way to do what I described in the original post - put vector layers in a group layer and still keep them bound to the parent bone layer?
The problem, though, is that I would need 4 or so bone layers: one for the left arm, one for the right arm, etc., and that would slow down the animation process. For example, I would have to select the "right leg" bone layer before I could move it. Then I would have to select the "left leg" bone layer before I could move it.
I really like using the bone tools without having to select different layers. It's fast and elegant.
Thanks for the idea, though. I might yet employ it.
So...is there no way to do what I described in the original post - put vector layers in a group layer and still keep them bound to the parent bone layer?
I don't really need to organize the layers. I only want to.
When I'm making art in Photoshop, if the number of layers becomes unwieldy, I'll create group layers and organize the layers. I'd like to do the same thing in ASP.
I can, actually.
The problem is, when I drag vector layers into a group layer, the bones stop working.
When I made the original post, I was hoping there was an obscure way I could group vector layers without detaching the bones, but now that you have posted, I have lost hope. If there was a way it could be done, you would've mentioned it in your post.
When I'm making art in Photoshop, if the number of layers becomes unwieldy, I'll create group layers and organize the layers. I'd like to do the same thing in ASP.
I can, actually.
The problem is, when I drag vector layers into a group layer, the bones stop working.
When I made the original post, I was hoping there was an obscure way I could group vector layers without detaching the bones, but now that you have posted, I have lost hope. If there was a way it could be done, you would've mentioned it in your post.
-
funksmaname
- Posts: 3174
- Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: New Zealand
bone layers only work on the first child level down, effectively a sub group layer can only be attached to a single bone... however - from your description it sounds like you use far too many layers unnecesserily if it's getting so messy you have to group stuff - why not consolidate shapes into a single layer? you could take those 6 layers that make up a shirt pocket and just copy them into a single vector layer 
Only keep things on seperate layers unless it really HELPS your workflow in animating the contents is my moto, otherwise you're just creating yourself clutter.
alternatively, I think what Ginete is suggesting is that isntead of a sub-nested group layer, sub-nest a bone layer, and use that to group stuff - then bone that layer (say [HAND]) and attach the whole bone layer 'group' to the parenting bone layer (say [WRIST])... it means you have to jump around to animate bones in two locations - although i vaguely remember there might have been a script at some point that allowed you to have 'clone' bones on the parent layer that control the bones that are further down? but they need to be copied and placed precisely - i dunno i've never done it...
Only keep things on seperate layers unless it really HELPS your workflow in animating the contents is my moto, otherwise you're just creating yourself clutter.alternatively, I think what Ginete is suggesting is that isntead of a sub-nested group layer, sub-nest a bone layer, and use that to group stuff - then bone that layer (say [HAND]) and attach the whole bone layer 'group' to the parenting bone layer (say [WRIST])... it means you have to jump around to animate bones in two locations - although i vaguely remember there might have been a script at some point that allowed you to have 'clone' bones on the parent layer that control the bones that are further down? but they need to be copied and placed precisely - i dunno i've never done it...
How did you know I use 6 layers to make a shirt pocket?!?!funksmaname wrote:from your description it sounds like you use far too many layers unnecesserily if it's getting so messy you have to group stuff - why not consolidate shapes into a single layer? you could take those 6 layers that make up a shirt pocket and just copy them into a single vector layer
But yes, I use a lot of layers. I do it because it makes changing things easier, and I need like 40-50 different people for characters in the background. If I don't want a pocket on Guy #5, I can just find the pocket layer and not render that layer. Or I can select shape and change the color of the pocket.
However, if the pocket were on a layer along with the torso shape, three different undershirt shapes, five different shirt shapes, and a few other shapes, selecting any particular shape would be a protracted exercise in perseverance.
That being said, I think I'll do what you suggest and consolidate layers. Thanks.
I guess I can start naming shapes; that might help when it comes time to select a particular shape buried in a deep pile of shapes. And I'll use color styles, which should also help.