Is this optimal though, in terms of rendering? What I mean is, aren't computing cycles still being wasted on transparent geometry in the scene, where "cloaked" or "invisible" objects are not computed in and rendering calculations at all? My whole concern is built around having animations that may require a series of transitions from object to similar object; You can imagine that if I have a string of say 12 of these, and each has fairly heavy detail, if the 11 "transparent" ones are still being noticed (at least in passing) by the renderer in terms of calculation, I'm going to bog down pretty hard...this is still a problem for the "hide them off camera" method, too isn't it? Or is it? Out of sight is out of mind (calculation time)? I have not tested any of this, but I'm concerned that "transparent" is not fully equal to "cloaked" in this respect. One says "let light pass through this", and the other says "don't waste any time on this, it's not here". From a code standpoint, I would feel better if we had a method that firmly says, "don't waste time on this object". --