Feature Request: Multiple Selections


#1

There are many times when I’ll have multiple objects and I’ll want to set them all the same. But I have to select each one-by-one and make the same changes to all of them individually.

For example, I have a job with about 15 objects that I just ran on one material. I want to take only one object and run it on another material. So I’m going to set all of the rest to Ignore. It’d be great if I could just Ctrl+Click and select each one, then select Set To Ignore and be done with it.

Thanks!


#2

I’ve found myself trying to use many of the hot keys from other programs in the GFUI nearly everytime I’m printing something. The one you mention is most commonly the one I try, but another I would like to see is a quick way to change between the selection tool and the grab tool. I did find out today that Ctrl+A does grab everything that’s placed on the bed so that’s nice. The typical zoom in and zoom out options are definitely a plus, too. I don’t think that it’s too far or much to ask that a future update adds some more of these options.

EDIT: I just remembered that one of the features that would really be nice is deleting layers in the GFUI instead of only having the ignore that we currently have. It gets messy when I have a two sided design that starts with a dark engrave, light engrave, score, and cut only to flip the print and have to ignore all those steps to process the second side. I typically overlap my designs to begin with so that I know for sure when I print the second side it’s aligned exactly where the first print was, and the greyed out ignored layers will occasionally not let me see the layers I’m trying to print.


#3

I agree this would be nice!


#4

Wow, this sounds like it would be a very useful addition to the software. In addition to being able to select multiple items by holding Ctrl, it would be cool if multiple items could he selected by using the mouse cursor to trace-out a four-sided shape with three 90° corners around the objects we want to select. It could be called “possibly non-uniformly scaled square selecting”.


#5

Thanks for the suggestion, @Tom_A! I’ll make sure the team gets them.


#6