Staff MattP Posted August 15, 2017 Author Staff Share Posted August 15, 2017 3 hours ago, Frank Jonen said: Is the "Reset Selection Box" supposed to bounce right back when the object is de-selected? If I'm right, you're asking why the next time you select the object that its selection box is not 'reset', yes? That's just because the 'reset' is a tool-time thing to help you make further transforms - it hasn't destructively set the transform of the object to anything (you can see this as the tool now shows the rotated box of the object in addition to a straight-up box of the whole area). I guess what you're after is some kind of 'commit transform' button to bake the data in this 'reset' form? A_B_C and Bauke 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff MattP Posted August 15, 2017 Author Staff Share Posted August 15, 2017 @dcarvalho84 I think I've just resolved the embedded document issue you are experiencing - that will be in the next Beta update too dcarvalho84 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A_B_C Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 I think such a “Commit Transform” button would indeed make sense in some use scenarios, at least for curves, Matt. I remember quite a few threads where precisely this feature had been requested, and I must say I would love to have such a handy option as well. Sure, there is the workaround with the larger rectangle and the Boolean Intersect (as well as similar ones), but if it should be easy to add such a Commit button, why not add it? This would give us both options … Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackofDiamonds Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 I've advocated for a "Commit Transform" in the past, but how would it be best implemented? Should it commit to the coordinate system of the document, or it's parent object? I say this because if you were to adjust a nested object, it would throw off the parent to bake in the transformation, unless that parent was also in line with the document. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Staff MattP Posted August 15, 2017 Author Staff Share Posted August 15, 2017 When you work on an object, we always show the object's local box affected by its own local transform. We'd just need to modify the data so that this local transform became identity, that's my initial reaction anyway... A_B_C 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackofDiamonds Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 I admit I'm a bit lost in what your response entails, exactly, so I'll try to show you what I mean. As I see it, there are two ways to commit a transform: you can have the object become square to the document so that every time you click the button you get a nice, clean rectangle, no matter where you are (the behavior we see temporarily in "Reset Selection Box"), or you can have the object become square to the parent object. The example below shows how, if you use the former option, the parent object's box becomes distorted from it's bounds when you apply it to the keyboard. However, the latter option is useful for correcting exactly that issue. And of course, if the object in question is at the top level with no parents, or if all parents have no transform, the two are indistinguishable. ... yes, I'm using designer for drafting. Gear maker, A_B_C and Frank Jonen 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Jonen Posted August 15, 2017 Share Posted August 15, 2017 14 hours ago, MattP said: If I'm right, you're asking why the next time you select the object that its selection box is not 'reset', yes? That's just because the 'reset' is a tool-time thing to help you make further transforms - it hasn't destructively set the transform of the object to anything (you can see this as the tool now shows the rotated box of the object in addition to a straight-up box of the whole area). I guess what you're after is some kind of 'commit transform' button to bake the data in this 'reset' form? Yes, I was expecting it to commit, but… your view brings up an interesting option. Why not have all scale, rotate, shear, etc. operations as modifiers (maybe with a toggle for cases where modifiers would be overkill)? This could also help with getting the vector warps done quicker, I reckon. Also helps with iteration. If you have modifiers exposed to the user in the layer stack. Similar to the fx or adjustment layers. That'd also make it possible to quickly apply complex transforms to a lot of items at once, maybe even store a modifier stack in a symbol-like fashion. Once you're good with how something looks and want to refine manually, click 'bake to object' and it's applied to your object. Or hold alt + click and create a new object with the modifiers applied while hiding and thus preserving the original. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts