Block Management Tools Need Improvements

[ivelin.peychev]

Watch out you guys, soon someone from McNeel will shoot you out with the “…get a refund…” bullshit.

[osuire]

@jespizua

Related to blocks in general, I would like to add that, the whole discussion about if blocks are a must feature or not, it’s irrelevant, why? because McNeel took the decision to implement blocks long time ago, so I think it’s McNeel’s responsibility to maintain blocks at least to the minimum

Not only that, but they are also promoting Rhino V7 as having improved display speed of blocks !!!
@stevebaer : I suggest you get the Blocks walking straight before you try to make them run.

[Gijs (Gijs de Zwart)]

@osuire

I suggest you get the Blocks walking straight before you try to make them run

hahaha, well @stevebaer you have to admit that this is funny, and one reason more to give blocks some love.

@7556 if blocks don’t render in V-Ray, certainly something is off, better start a new thread for this

[7556]

@Gijs okay good to know that that’s not normal. will open a new thread tomorrow, thanks

[stevebaer]

@Gijs

hahaha, well @stevebaer you have to admit that this is funny, and one reason more to give blocks some love.

Yes, I know that block and block management tools could use improvements. I appreciate the input from you and most of the community. I wish we had something to provide you in this week’s WIP, but we don’t.

[osuire]

@stevebaer

I wish we had something to provide you in this week’s WIP, but we don’t.

Well, I’ve been waiting 20 years for this, I can wait until next week

[Brenda]

“…block and block management tools could use improvements. …” != The block management will be improved.

[eobet]

Since this thread seems to have become a repository for all Block Manager complaints, let me link a few more on this topic:

Change layer of block *definition*?

Having a bit of trouble finding this one - scriptwise, how does one change the layer of a block definition (not an instance)? I don’t see any reference to the layer on which a definition resides in the InstanceDefinition Class. But it does indeed reside on a layer, as if you want to delete a layer which has a block definition on it, you get a warning message. The idea being that a definition might reside on a layer which is otherwise empty, but it has instances on other layers. If you want to…

Whish: quick switch from linked block to embedded block

Hi, if I try to edit a linked block I get the message “An other copy of rhino will be opened to edit this linked block”. Could be nice to get an option to set the block to embedded mode and edit in place. If it can’t be implement for this situation and little command could be nice too, that could be started before block edit. Ciao, Micha

Script to convert embedded blocks to linked?

Hi guys! I am starting a new thread for this matter but I actually found one where this was pretty much adressed except that I need to convert many embedded blocks into linked ones. The script supplied in that thread only works for individuals I imagine that if you have a file with all the blocks you wish to link inserted, then its just a matter of matching names: You could select all your 200 embedded blocks on your current file, and when asked which file to obtain the linked blocks from, t…

I like that Rhino can be scripted, but at some point, there must come a breaking point where things should go “native”.

I’m guessing, since the only time a Rhino file is part of a bigger project is in architecture, and since there are architecture add-ons which cost more than Rhino itself, these add-ons probably circumvent/fix the block manager so users don’t get frustrated by it, and the only people still pulling their hair out are industrial designers, which Rhino isn’t really suited for anyway? (And my last claim is due to filleting and pdm incompability, before anyone asks.)

[D-W (Przemysław Doliwa)]

@osuire

I suggest you get the Blocks walking straight before you try to make them run.

Bullseye!

I would like also to point out that RhinoCommon for blocks is also lame or at least cumbersome and implemented partially - eg. for URL of blocks only getter is provided… And for few yrs you guys are telling to use scripts inside the code (import/export) instead of providing a complete toolset for this.

Besides …

Oh, really? Do you mean when I put in 100 projects the same tree which weight is 100mb I’m a fool that I want to save 10 GB of disk space? If we would go to small production cases when I would use up to 20/30+ trees bushes etc I don’t even want to sum how much space I’m wasting cause of wishy-washy handling of blocks…

[EricM (Eric Paul Marvets)]

May all our V5 bug fixes and wishes make it into V8!

Here’s one more for the pile: Exclude ref geometry from a block definition.

I’m working on a complex part. I need to bring in a neighboring reference geometry to check fit and alignment, but I don’t want that ref geometry to be included in the parent model (the actual neighbor is there).

Either that or be able to edit the linked block in place in the parent model.

It’s already been mentioned, but needing a clipping plane in a block is a real feels bad. There’s no way to disable (or exclude). Your consuming model is stuck with an enabled clipping plane no matter what.

[mary (Mary Ann Fugier)]

Hi @EricM ,

@EricM

Exclude ref geometry from a block definition.

Can you explain more about this? Yes, currently you can include a linked block nested in a block definition. You can change the block insert layer to a locked layer, so it can be excluded.

I logged the linked block “Linked blockedit in place” RH-62146

And finally you would like to “disable clipping” to be an object property? So a block or any object could be tagged to not use the clipping plane? Currently the clipping plane is set to the view.

Thanks for your help.
Sincerely,
Mary Ann Fugier

[EricM (Eric Paul Marvets)]

@mary

You can change the block insert layer to a locked layer , so it can be excluded.

I think this may be what I’m wanting, but can you explain how to do it?

And yes, if you have a clipping plane in a block, each instance will include that clipping plane. Then you have to disable every instance for the view.

A clipping plane in a block definition is only useful when editing the block. It doesn’t make sense for each instance to repeat the clipping plane. It should be disabled, hidden, and locked on the instance.

[Noah_Bishop]

I agree with many comments in this thread, and it seems that Block Management is still cumbersome in Rhino 8. This feature is one aspect that makes it difficult for my Architecture firm to transition from SketchUp to Rhino. McNeel PLEASE improve this in future updates. Features available in SketchUp components such as double-click to edit nested blocks, being able to “make unique,” being able to more easily manage layers for Block Definitions, the block has its own Coordinates, etc, etc.

[Dan_Stone (Dan)]

If, like me you got here from a google search, then our prayers were in fact answered:

Check out this neat little orange icon under properties when a block is selected.

On the other hand, my block edit pane still looks like this:

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaah

If only next to create unique was a little edit in place button so I can edit the block currently selected rather than having to guess which one it is from the very long list of similar things. Or, indeed, by double clicking on it. And the Block Edit pane could auto-collapse identically named instances… but it gets better all the time.

[osuire]

Don’t hold your breath, I’ve been pointing at that lamentable UI for over 20 years.

[user2745 (Sven)]

Yes, please update. This is definitely a bottleneck. Finding a selected block when there is a large number of blocks is really painful.

[scottd (Scott Davidson)]

Currently a architects are using the Block Edit New plugin to get this functionality: Block Edit New | Food4Rhino

Seems to be quite useful.

[osuire]

@scottd

Seems to be quite useful.

Yeah, some student did a better job in a few weeks than McNeel in 25 years.

Seriously Scott, for V9, don’t you think it would be more important to have a decent Block managing interface rather than being able to make custom hatches with Grasshopper ?

You guys really have no clue when it comes to setting priorities.

[ivan.galik]

absolutely agree with you. trivialities are being adressed and added and not core fucntionality.

[mi.land]

Stay friendly please!

Yes i use the plugin. Yes ist sad that it is not core. No i dont think its a student who did it in a few weeks.

I do like creating my own hatches since its was a very old clumpsy system before.

Can i judge the priorities as a single user. Do i know who can program what. How many requests are on this or that topic. What are the consequensces of changing the engine in this or that part ?

Maybe the hatches stuff was simple and easy to implement.

Rhino is a top notch community, with a great rhino team. And your wished will be heared somtimes slowly.

Peace out.
1 friendly vote for implementing this plugin as a core system!