Yes that is expected behavior. Assuming you are linking collection. View layer data is a separate data-block. You may be able to link view layer data, but I'm not sure. Now you could just link the scene instead of the collection. If I remember correctly view layers are apart of the scene data.
When you untick the check box for the view layer, when you link that collecting in another file, it will be visible since the unticking the view layer doesn't make it invisible. If you wanted it invisible you would have to turn off the visibility icon in the original file, not unticking the view layer overall. But why do you want it invisible? Invisible is practically not having it there, so why link it in in the first place?
Hi Dwayne,
Thank you for confirming.
I tried linking the scene instead of the collection, but then nothing at all came over with the link. You gave me an idea, however, that seems to have worked. In the .blend file to be linked, I moved the collection that contained the reference geometry out of the user-created main collection. So my node tree looked like: Scene Collection>Collection>Ref Geo Collection | Main Collection
I linked to the Main Collection and it looks like everything came across like it should. I will need to test several renders of the scene into which I linked the complex environment to make sure none of the instances are missing their reference geometry.
I also widened my Google search about this subject, and I found a Stack Exchange post from 6 months ago. It suggested to me that I should disable the reference geometry collection using the Monitor icon instead of the View Layer checkbox. That worked without me having to move anything around in the source file. (I made sure to disable the Render icon, too.)
For completeness, here's the link to the Stack Exchange post: https://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/311368/can-exclude-from-view-be-kept-disabled-during-an-append-can-it-be-done-with-p
Hi Omar,
The parts of the original model that should be seen and rendered are all instances. All the reference geometry is piled up in the middle of the scene. That's why I need the reference geometry to be invisible. The original file has all of the reference geometry excluded from view.
I see what you're trying to do. I was thinking compositing by separating into view layers. This is just me, but what I do when using collection instancing is I right click on the collection and choose unlink. (Side note: don't unlink objects. That's like deleting them) if you decide you need to edit the collection or an object inside that collection you can switch from view layer mode to blend file mode(icon to the right of editor selection icon). Expand the collection section and then right click on the hidden collection and click link to scene. Of course you can also just stick with disable in viewport (monitor icon)
Thank you Dwayne and JL; I appreciate the insights.
I have a lot to learn about View Layers. Is that in the Fundamentals of Compositing course?
Dwayne, a couple more questions, if I may.
1. The Unlink thing that you suggested for collections worked. I'm puzzled by what the unlinking actually does. It would seem that if you unlink the collection from the scene, then the instances would lose their geometry references that are contained inside. But that's obviously not the case because the instances in my scene rendered properly. So if they can still be referenced, how does unlinking tell Blender not to display them? Is it because the Blender Viewport and the Blender Render reference the scene and not the individual data-blocks? (That's my best guess, even though I barely comprehend data-blocks.)
2. Is there a simple way to understand the difference between collection instancing (Add>Collection Instance...) and object instancing (Object>Duplicate Linked)? Or a good reference I can study?
Thank you again!
Yes, view layers are covered in the compositing. I watched first. I know I should have started with modeling, but since that's my second weakest area I've decided to do it and my weakest sculpting last.
1. If you select objects and press Ctrl+g you create a hidden collection (technically an unlinked collection). The collection is still part of the blend file along with all objects assigned to it. They just aren't linked to the scene. Under the hood, this unlinks the collection from the scene and links it to a fake user. So the collection and all objects in the collection are then linked to the fake user. This is just like a material when you click the shield 🛡️ icon. Clicking that icon assigns the material to the fake user. That way if you delete the material (unlink the material) from the object it is still a part of the blend file.
2. First, object instance(linked duplicate) are object containers that share the same data. Mesh data in most cases. We refer to objects by their data. For example a light/lamp object is an object that has light/lamp data and yes lights can be linked duplicated. Second, collection is a container that holds collections and objects. When you instance a collection, you get everything that is in the collection, and it acts as one object. A good example of this is a school chair and desk. If you instance a collection with both in it then the chair and desk act as one object. So the objects become the data for the collection instances.
Excellent explanations. Thank you!
Modeling and sculpting are both weak areas for me as well. Along with Geometry Nodes and UV Maps. I want to focus my art and any work I do on being the production designer and DP. I need to know enough modeling to be able to "fix" the models I use in my scenes (like the wonky wiper on the tram) and enough texturing/material/shader skills to be able to suss why this material isn't doing what I expected it to do under these lighting conditions. So lighting, rigging, animation and compositing are the CORE areas on which I need to focus. 😀
For a long time, I tried to learn all about every piece of software that I was going to use before jumping into a project. I'd read the manual and watch tutorials before I ever tried to start. Often I ended up, as you say, a "software academic". I could figure stuff out and create tutorials, but many times I didn't create things with the software beyond test projects and tutorials.
Now I tend to do "on-demand" learning. I'll watch a few tutorials or take a couple of courses in the software to get familiar with the basics, then I'll dive in and start a project and seek help and learning if I run into difficulties (which I usually do pretty quickly). Software these days is so complex and can do so many things that it is virtually impossible to learn and be proficient in everything it can do, ever. It's been said that a user spends 80% of their time using only 20% of the software's capabilities. I think that's especially true for Blender.
So no worries, Dwayne. You being a Blender academic has provided me with a ton of good information that has gone into my "book of words", which is what I call my collection of notes on the software I use. Thank you! 😊
