Maxwell Render | Official public forum

I don't know if this was always the case, but why are References in References skipped?

When I build a model (ship) and add References like furniture and equipment, I load this MXS file as a MWreference into my renderscene which contains environments, lighting and other ships. In this workflow I only have to update the basic shipsmodel when changes are to be made and it gets updated in my "renderscene". Moving the ships model would also move the nested references.

I have allready setup multiple renderscenes and now find out it doesn't work!? What would be a workable solution?

Any help is appreciated!

Sorry to say, but yes, this has always been the case (see the note here).

Could it be possible to make this work? I've also had this situation a few times where I would have been really happy with having mxs references inside of mxs references....

kami wrote:Could it be possible to make this work? I've also had this situation a few times where I would have been really happy with having mxs references inside of mxs references....

+1

kami wrote:Could it be possible to make this work?

Sure it's possible, but I don't know if it's a goal. I know it would be no fun, since you'd actually have to load every referenced file, in order to read its references, and then load each of those, for the same reason, and so on, in order to check for potential circular references. This could defeat much of the purpose for using referenced MXS files (lower use of memory, faster export) in the first place.

In this workflow I only have to update the basic shipsmodel

How many of the same ship model do you have in your scene?

Sorry for this late reply, as getting closer to the hollidays it seems there's more and more work

Hi Mihai,

It depends, sometimes just one model. Sometimes it's more, but different ships. It would just be nice to have a shipsmodel decorated with referenced library parts and have this whole scene then imported into the renderscene. Like I wrote before, moving your shipsmodel would also keep the added models/references in place. For sure this would be very nice for animation as opposed to linking things together.

Cheers

Hi JD,

This thread has died of a bit, but I'm wondering if there are more users who would like at least one extra level of MWreferences. I understand that the functionality of MWrefs are getting useless if there would be Reference in Reference in Reference a.s.o. but I can imagine multiple situtations where a Reference in a Reference would be very enjoyable.

Cheers,

Mark

Indeed, trees in referenced scene would be nice, so one more level.

+1

One more level will allow for example an outdoor scene with multiple referenced trees to be packed and referenced in camera animation scene.

I would like to bump this thread as we still could very much use the possibility of second level references.