"View all Frames" not working

Sometimes when I hit the "eye" button to make all frames viewable ( I'm still experimenting with features so I don't have that many frames, like 10 ) it doesn't work. I've had it work before, and I can see outlines of things on top of each other indicating that I can see through frames and see all objects. But a lot of time, when I click that button it takes me to a particular frame and that's all I see. Just one frame. I toggle it, same thing.

Is there some thing I'm forgetting? I do move the quality slider for a realizty check, and there I can see many frames and object outlines, but I shouldnt have to do that to get it to work.

Any ideas on why this might be happening? Does it have to do with which items ( or how many ) are background or which are overlays?

Thanks

Tallis,

It sounds to me that your talking about creating an animation rather than a drawing window. The only reason I can suggest that you can't see the frames below except in wireframe is that the image in the top frame (which is now the bottom frame in XXPro for some reason I don't understand) is hiding all the shapes in the frames below.

maybe if some of the objects have gradient/transparency and no stroke line this might contribute to such an effect

isnt the re-ordering of the frames to make import/export of sequenced files easier, allegedly - I'm sure I read that somewhere?

Quote:

---

isnt the re-ordering of the frames to make import/export of sequenced files easier, allegedly - I'm sure I read that somewhere?

---

It might be Steve, thanks. It just seems cackhanded to me to place the Background layer on the top layer. Layers in Flash work the way Xtreme used to (top down) and I can't say I like this bottom down set up.

Egg:

Yes, it is an animation. Should an image on the top be able to hide other frames in "view all" mode, or is this basically either a bug, or file corrution?

When I click the eye button, no matter what frame I'm in, it kicks me to one particular frame, I think liek # 7 or 8 down, and displays that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Egg Bramhill

It might be Steve, thanks. It just seems cackhanded to me to place the Background layer on the top layer. Layers in Flash work the way Xtreme used to (top down) and I can't say I like this bottom down set up.

---

indeed I agree - not intuitive at all :(

Tallis - if you are able to post up file maybe someone could see if theres a problem with it :)

Hi Guys,

I don't think it's a bug or a file corruption but just plain old common sense.

If you have 3 layers (or frames in this case) and the top layer has a red square, the 2nd layer has a blue square in the exact same position and the 3rd layer has a green square in the exact same position, then what would you expect a "view all" button to display?. A red square? A blue square? A green square? A combination of all three? (Whatever that would be!). Surely the answer would be a red square as that is on top of all the other squares.

I attach a sample xar file. There are 4 frames. Each frame has a numbered orange square and the same numbered blue square, but the blue square is offset whilst the orange square is in the exact same position.

Click on an individual frame and you will see the orange and blue squares and the corresponding numbers.

Click on view all and you see the four blue squares + numbers (because of the offset) but only one orange square + the number four (because of the overlay) .

Wind the view quality to WireFrame and you see the squares and numbers below the orange squares.

What else are you expecting to see when selecting "view all"?

In your example, I was expecting to see, in the top-left yellow square, a number two to be seen under a number 3, etc. To me, see all means see all: a yellow square does not hide the number below it. I wasn't expecting that, for example, shapes would trump smaller shapes (or text, numbers) below.

The bug was in my brain. Thanks, Egg.