<p>The linking workflow is somehow controversial, and it's planned to be redesigned or at least improved with project Gooseberry, we could wait some little time and see what happens.<br>
My opinion is that linking is not as bad as they say, in production we overcame most limitations using python scripting, I think it's a good, yet underdeveloped, workflow.<br>
For instance groups of groups and namespaces could reasonably solve the issue here.<br>
</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">Il giorno 23/apr/2014 04:57, "Tamito KAJIYAMA" <<a href="mailto:rd6t-kjym@asahi-net.or.jp">rd6t-kjym@asahi-net.or.jp</a>> ha scritto:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Hi,<br>
<br>
Just some random thoughts that came to my mind:<br>
<br>
Groups do not seem to provide a good enough solution to link/append a<br>
set of objects and associated Freestyle settings including groups,<br>
because groups only deal with object membership by definition.<br>
<br>
How about using scenes as a unit of link/append operations?<br>
<br>
1. Set up a character in a scene, rig it, and gives it a Freestyle<br>
setting. If you have another character or more, you do the same in<br>
independent scenes.<br>
2. Open another .blend file and link the scene.<br>
3. Select the character (or a group that includes the character) and<br>
Make Link to another scene where the character is going to be used.<br>
4. Copy the line sets from the linked scene, and paste them to the other<br>
scene. Group references in line sets will remain valid.<br>
<br>
Linking a scene instead of a group makes more sense to me, since it<br>
allows importing everything associated to the character asset.<br>
<br>
I guess the steps from 2. to 4. can be automated more and less by an<br>
add-on (say, a "Freestyle Asset Linker" add-on).<br>
<br>
Note that line sets are part of scene datablocks and cannot be linked<br>
(appended) directly. It is my impression that this design increases some<br>
complexity in link/append workflows, which if necessary is a matter of<br>
discussion and future improvements. A relevant question here is: should<br>
line sets and line styles be unified?<br>
<br>
--<br>
KAJIYAMA, Tamito <<a href="mailto:rd6t-kjym@asahi-net.or.jp">rd6t-kjym@asahi-net.or.jp</a>><br>
<br>
<br>
On 22/04/2014 03:27, Vicente wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> Ok, yes, it works. But it's independent of the "Instance groups" option.<br>
> The user has to import the main group AND the groups with the FS<br>
> information.<br>
> It's not the most intuitive workflow (at least for me)... but definitely<br>
> it will do the trick for me. :)<br>
> But I assume that a lot of blender users are going to import only the<br>
> main group and expect the whole thing is going to work, so maybe this<br>
> should be arranged in other way in a future.<br>
><br>
> Thanks<br>
><br>
> Vicente<br>
><br>
><br>
> On mán 21.apr 2014 16:14, Tamito KAJIYAMA wrote:<br>
>> Hi Vicente,<br>
>><br>
>>> We can not import "freestyle" or "no-freestyle" because it would be<br>
>>> pointless.<br>
>> It would be pointless because what we want to import is logical<br>
>> membership of objects in a group, and not duplicates of the objects in<br>
>> the group, right?<br>
>><br>
>> Re-thinking of this issue, I just got to know that the Link and Append<br>
>> commands on groups have an option called Instance Groups (enabled by<br>
>> default). Turning this option off seems to achieve exactly what we need.<br>
>> Could you please confirm it?<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Bf-blender-npr mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Bf-blender-npr@blender.org">Bf-blender-npr@blender.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-blender-npr" target="_blank">http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-blender-npr</a><br>
</blockquote></div>