Completing the Ipos

Animation tools, character animation, non linear animation

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

Dani
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 8:35 pm

Completing the Ipos

Postby Dani » Mon Apr 19, 2004 11:34 pm

Hello!

Since blender has been open-source a few changes have occured in materials, textures and world.
For example, materials have new shader types with there own sliders.
Raytracing introduced another few sliders. There also is translucency and displacement mapping.
World has also got new stuff, like the ambient occlusion tab with cursors. The exposition cursor has been split into two sliders "exp" and "range".

All these new functions should be animatable. They should have there own IPOs'.

There are a few other pre-existing functions that do not have there IPOs like the Amb RVB sliders in "world".

So I think the IPOs' list should be updated. Everything that anyone could conceive as animatable should have it's IPO, cause that's where creativity is (sounds good =)

What do you guys think? useless? too difficult? completely feasible! let's do it!

??

;)

Ciao
Dani

Monkeyboi
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Postby Monkeyboi » Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:39 am

Definately agreed!

XSI lets you animate EVERY parameter in the entire application. The trouble with Blender is that the IPO list would be so long it would be hard to get an overview. The solution is to create a panels system in the IPO window so that you can collapse parts like so:

http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/ipowindow.htm

ideasman
Posts: 1000
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2003 2:37 pm

Postby ideasman » Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:51 am

A solution could be to have a hierarchy of properities, rather then a big list.
Mabe a tab view? Scrollable list?
Then all the properities could be accsessed.

This is a UI issue, and should not hold back functionality of blender.

- Cam

Monkeyboi
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Postby Monkeyboi » Tue Apr 20, 2004 12:48 pm

ideasman wrote:A solution could be to have a hierarchy of properities, rather then a big list.
Mabe a tab view? Scrollable list?
Then all the properities could be accsessed.

This is a UI issue, and should not hold back functionality of blender.

No no, as I said, it could be done with tabs..

I completely agree.

Dani
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 8:35 pm

Postby Dani » Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:39 pm

Indeed, the layout is only a UI problem, but it shouldn't be overlooked neither.

They hierarchy solution as you both exposed is a good thing. But I don't think it should use the same tabs as the rest of blender. They eat too much space.

The groups should be:
-collapsable
-discrete (shouldn't eat up space)
-there order should not be rearrangeable. (you can't drag an drop the groups above others etc...) this is to keep stuff fixed. "WHere is time?" "Where it has always been".
-have explicit names.

I guess that's it.

Dani

Monkeyboi
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Postby Monkeyboi » Tue Apr 20, 2004 2:54 pm

I can't really see any waste of space in the mockup.. Care to elaborate?

I think it is good to have full names. "Color" instead of "Col" for example.

Dani
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2002 8:35 pm

Postby Dani » Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:20 pm

ehe, it surely is a matter of tastes, so i doesn't matter so much.

There surely isn't a need for such cascades of boxing as in the first pic on your site. I mean, there's the Transform tab, and there are the position/rotation/scale subtabs... It's just about the form, nowhere else in blender there are subtabs... i'd see something a lot more sober for the subtabs like (roughly) this:

____________
-Position
...................
...................
...................
____________
+Rotation
____________
+Scale
____________

(i guess this is not very explicit)
I mean, very simple design for the subtabs, nice lines to separate subsections, +/- for expand and collapse. Then you can keep the Major tabs as you offer an the input buttons too (an the nice collapse/expand animations for all this ;) )

But really, that is not soooo important. THe first thing is getting all the ipos there! (well, yeah, i know, we need place to fit them in)

Oh, (feeling silly) I don't understand how, in your mockup we can see which IPO entry actually has a curve in it.

Ciao!
Dani

ZanQdo
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 4:57 am

Postby ZanQdo » Wed Apr 28, 2004 2:50 am

Monkeyboi, your ideas are great, I want to see those IPO panels working (I don’t like the current configuration). Your RVKs ideas are even better, Both, Maya and AnimationMaster, have something similar to your morph targets controller in the 3d window, but yours is better :D This kind of things helps a lot. The only thing I disagree is in removing the copy/paste buttons.

steve_t
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2002 7:10 am

Postby steve_t » Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:52 am

I totally agree with monkeyboi's proposal for the ipo window. THey are are right on. I can't remember how many times I have scrolled through the right window to find the ipo's that I am using. This rvk system would really be a great addition too.

The ability to see and type in exact numbers for the currently selected handle in that right window would also be a big pluss. How many times did you just want to type in a rotation.


any idea if any coders are working on ipo functionality at all?

dcuny
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2003 11:22 pm

Postby dcuny » Wed Apr 28, 2004 9:30 am

I've been learning Blender for the last couple of years, and just this afternoon tried to re-learn the RVK system. Part of my difficulty is that I'm very bad at remembering "magic" key combinations.

Despite having two tutorials available to me, puzzling through RVKs was quite a chore. There's a lot of "magic" in the current setup, and even following the instructions step-by-step, it took me several attempts through the demos before things would work "right".

I don't think I've seen a single bad proposal by Monkeyboi, but the RVK system is certainly one of the most confusing parts of Blender.

The main thing I like about the proposal is that it makes it exteremely obvious how to do things in the IPO windows. As a bonus, it adds sliders, so I can work with RVKs the way that I normally think about them, instead of having to create curves - certainly not my first choice for doing things!

There was a lot of activity on the Blender Funboard in the Fall, but a lot of that seems to have died out. I'm hoping that now that the new Blender book is out, people will again focus on usability for the rest of the UI.

Monkeyboi
Posts: 561
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Postby Monkeyboi » Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:26 pm

There was a lot of activity on the Blender Funboard in the Fall, but a lot of that seems to have died out. I'm hoping that now that the new Blender book is out, people will again focus on usability for the rest of the UI.


This is mainly due to two reasons: 1, that the coders hardly ever listened to the funboard and 2, that Broken, one of the main interface guys has been on a really long vacation in the east.

I'm very glad you like the RVK proposal.

theeth
Posts: 1184
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 5:47 am
Location: Montreal
Contact:

Postby theeth » Wed Apr 28, 2004 4:35 pm

Monkeyboi wrote:1, that the coders hardly ever listened to the funboard

That's mainly due to one reason. Funboard quickly turned into a bickering mess where some people would argue about the slightliess detail. I'm not pointing fingers are anyone.

Structure proposals like the ones you did is the kind of thing we are looking for. However, like you said, not many coders work on the GUI. Though IIRC, Broken is back from vacation right, so work on the GUI should pick up speed again.

Martin
Life is what happens to you when you're busy making other plans.
- John Lennon


Return to “Animation”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest