Avoiding effect rotation?

[Jim Graham]

Yes, that is the intended solution/way of looking at the system.  For 
better or worse we apply the transform to the effected node rather than 
applying the effect to the transformed node and any of these ordering 
behaviors can be renegotiated by using encapsulated groups.  (Hopefully 
we've created a default order of operations on a node that matches the 
most common expectations, but there will always be exceptions to any 
rule...)

		...jim

On 11/19/12 5:46 PM, Scott Palmer wrote:
> On 2012-11-19, at 7:54 PM, Randahl Fink Isaksen <randahl at rockit.dk> wrote:
>
>> I noticed that if you rotate a beach ball with JavaFX, its drop shadow rotates along with it. For a beach ball at least, this is not natural. Let's say that the drop shadow is located below the ball at its right-hand side. Once you rotate the ball the location of the drop shadow starts circling the ball, which obviously never happens in real life. So, while I can see why rotatable effects might be useful in some cases, at least for a beach ball it looks odd.
>>
>> I would imagine that the most common case is that you do not want a drop shadow to rotate along with its object, but can anyone confirm that this is an intentional design decision, and / or if there is some work-around for this.
>
> I haven't tried it yet, but as a potential work-around I would place the rotated beach ball in a Group and then apply the shadow to the Group.
>
> Scott
>