i want to change the position of a layer but...

[mutismo]

hello people,
i got a question: ¿how can i move up or down a certain layer without having to move up or down the entire line of clips in the deck?
sometimes i want to change the order... just for playing with the blend options but then i find my layer 1, per example, between the 2 and the 3 and it causes me some confusion when i want to select a layer from my midi surface... because i push the wrong button ))

any idea?

(sorry about my english)

[Joris]

Hey Mutismo

Unfortunately, as far as I can figure, there is no way to do this. Clips and mappings are always tied to a layer row in Avenue.

Joris

[bart]

Note that the clip position is relative to the clip porsition so if you move the X position of a layer to 100 and the clip position to 20 then the action position of the clip will be 120 (100+20).

This also works with negative, so layer to 100 and clip to -100 wil show the clip at position 0 (100-100).

Edit: blah blah blah you can ignore this, I was not paying attention to you actual question

[Joris]

I think he or she was talking about the position in the order of the layers rather than the position in pixels, but then again I may be mistaken.

[bart]

Aah duh, yes sorry, my mistake

We could make an ALT click to move a layer up or down without also moveing all the clips ... let us ponder this ...

[VJsynC]

yeah, that would be great, i too have needs of changing the lays position., you could make an alt key or having in the preferences the option to change the layers with line of clips or without line of clips.

[mandawah]

Hi there,

just wanted to mention my greate interest for this feature to be added in a next version.

Personally, I would prefer to simply enable "don't move deck clip lines when moving layer" in preferences, rather than alt+clicking (since I guess I won't ever click without alt).

Thanks in advance for considering this request.

[gpvillamil]

Related: it would be nice to be able to edit the name of a layer, but always have it prefixed by its "real" layer number (the one you use to address it via OSC).

For example, if I just add a bunch of layers and rearrange them, it might end up like this:

Layer 2
Layer 3
Layer 1

It would be cool if they were labelled:

1: Layer 2
2: Layer 3
1: Layer 1

Where the number before the : is the layer number that is used in OSC addresssing.

[mandawah]

gpvillamil: I was thinking about exactly the same thing yesterday... I was beginning to play with OSC for the first time and was confused about this discrepancy in between "user" label and OSC id.

But as far as I understood, the OSC always considers the bottom layer as 1, the one above as 2, etc. (so top is 3 if you have 3 layers). Am I right?

So the "X" in OSC "layer[X]" parameter is more like a "stack index" rather than a unique layer id...

[gpvillamil]

Yes, exactly. The issue is that by default the labels are labelled "Layer 1", "Layer 2" etc as they are created, whereas the OSC labels always reference the actual position. When you move layers, the labels no longer match the position. So I'd like the "real" number to be prefixed to the label, so that you can always know which one is being addressed.

gpvillamil: I was thinking about exactly the same thing yesterday... I was beginning to play with OSC for the first time and was confused about this discrepancy in between "user" label and OSC id.

But as far as I understood, the OSC always considers the bottom layer as 1, the one above as 2, etc. (so top is 3 if you have 3 layers). Am I right?

So the "X" in OSC "layer[X]" parameter is more like a "stack index" rather than a unique layer id...