groupingObject usage and applied poses

  • I'm hoping for some feedback on other Poser users' experience with using groupingObjects and constraints, before I submit a feature/change request.

    I'm finding it really convenient for constrained parenting of props which need to change their constraints during animation to use the groupingObjects. They're extremely useful in this regard, including being able to be saved and re-applied as library poses.

    The slight difficulty I'm running into, though, is that at the point of their creation, they get a fixed, scene-sequence numbered internal name, which cannot be altered within the scene by the user. Sure, their external name which the user sees can be changed, but other types of user-created scene objects can have their internal name set at creation time. Having that internal name essentially locked, causes conflicts when poses or collections of figures, props and constraints are subsequently applied from the library to another scene with a different sequence of constraint/groupingObject creation. Poses and scene subsets are applied or merged via their internal names, so a different sequence order causes misapplication of the pose.

    Now, I can work around this by saving a scene out and editing the scene file and/or poses to use unique, non-sequentially internally named groupingObjects, matching their external names, so the reloaded scene can have poses saved from it correctly applied to the groupingObjects they're intended for. But, again, I feel that I shouldn't have to jump through such hoops. If I were asked for a name at creation time (which also applies to creating the groupingObjects by Python script, which also just creates the next, automatically, sequentially named groupingObject that then can have an external name applied, but has no provision for changing its internal name), I could guarantee that poses saved for that groupingObject will correctly apply if I combine it with a figure or prop and save that to the library, then load it into another scene with pre-existing, different groupingObjects.

  • Well, it appears that none of the frequent posters on these forums uses groupingObjects sufficiently to post an opinion. Therefore, in the manner of the Orange Hypnotoad, I'll treat that as tacit approval to submit a change request, because obviously, if no one (that I care to listen to) is complaining, it must be a good idea...

    Anyone?... Anyone?... [Bueller's taking his day off today, obviously] ;-)

  • It is a bit odd that you can't change the internal name from the UI