Hi Michael ...

> It's more like - say you take a bunch of different objects which together make a chair. If you take that and then "Group" them into a group named chair, should that right there be enough to define an instance so that if you copied the chair group you would have 2 instances of the same base chair, or should it be that when you copy the group it forms a totally separate "Chair #2" group that is just a plain copy of the other one and not connected to it as instances are.

Now to me, and it's just the way i think, and it may well be flawed, but if you have the grouped objects to create an instance. With the Hierarchy structure in place, if you want an instance of a group, then you should request it in some way, instance along a curve and how many etc, ideal for tank tracks etc. If wheels, then mirror instance. The "Parent" group or original could then have an icon in the objects list to signify that it is a parent of instanced objects.

Rhino's handling of the blocks was alien and non sensible ... Create a group, convert to a block - Bye bye geometry, now import it back in and then say where you want it and if you need it rotating this way or offset here or inserted there ... YUGH!!!

In your analogy of the chair group then the first one created would remain as a tangible group, any further copies would have to be decided upon by the end user as to whether they needed instanced geometry or if they can afford the resources of having a direct copy. Instances to me are just a memory/speed saving measure which is of course highly desired within a 32bit environment. I don't like throwing spanners into the mixing bowl, but since MOI has no ray trace rendering engine, and most models are therefore exported to the likes of MAX, C4D, Blender et al then you could in reality leave instancing to those applications as most already do it. It would be harsh but understandable, and I would really like to see instances in MOI.

Martin