About Blender interface...

The interface, modeling, 3d editing tools, import/export, feature requests, etc

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

oktodindon
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:46 am

Post by oktodindon » Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:57 pm

Who's talking about sacrifices ??? We're talking about improvements !

And isn't it elitist to condamn occasional users only because... they are occasional ? Occasional doesn't mean "let's model a 3D bee, in my freetime... oh I'm bored of it, let's give up". As I said I'm interested to use Blender for working.

I guess that's why commercial softwares are more intuitive... Maybe because they listen to their users intead of yelling at them.

Make a mondial survey about Blender's UI. From this survey, delete all results coming from open-source close-minded extremists, and let's see how much people give up Blender because its UI, let's see how much people think their learning curve was fast.

OK I say the same thing from the beginning... And OK I admit I didn't check the forum before to come and criticize. Sorry for that.

elander
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:30 pm

Post by elander » Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:52 pm

oktodindon wrote:Who's talking about sacrifices ??? We're talking about improvements !
No you are talking about YOUR improvements. You don't even bother with other people think outside your "ocasional" user category, allways defined acording to your personal preferences.
oktodindon wrote:As I said I'm interested to use Blender for working.
I don't give a damn for intentions.
oktodindon wrote:I guess that's why commercial softwares are more intuitive... Maybe because they listen to their users intead of yelling at them.
And they are payed to tolerate arrogant and childish posters which i'm not paid for. I'm not even part of the Blender dev team.
oktodindon wrote:Make a mondial survey about Blender's UI. From this survey, delete all results coming from open-source close-minded extremists, and let's see how much people give up Blender because its UI, let's see how much people think their learning curve was fast.
Also include useless spam contributions. Powa to tha occassuunal user lololol, do it my way cause im one of them.
oktodindon wrote:OK I say the same thing from the beginning... And OK I admit I didn't check the forum before to come and criticize. Sorry for that.
I don't need your sorries for anything. If you want to make claims about "improvements" to the ui then at least do your home work and back them up.

oktodindon
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:46 am

Post by oktodindon » Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:36 pm

Searchers spend their lives on cognitive science, analyzing how the brain react to perception. They spend their lives on determining what's intuitive and what is not.

Then you arrive, "hey guys, stop searching, I have the solution : just work hard and harder and it will get easier".

UI design is a science. I don't have the keys of the truth, but average has. Every 3D software in this world, XSI - Maya - 3DS - C4D - Houdini - Silo - Modo - Lightwave, use the SAME kind of UI because it's been APPROVED by MILLIONS of people over the world. So "my" improvements are improvements for MILLIONS of people. And you want to make me believe that Blender and his unique UI is better than all the others ??

So it's ok... Keep your nice elite software, your nice elite mind and your nice elite blender users.

Long life to Blender.

kAinStein
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:08 pm

Post by kAinStein » Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:44 pm

oktodindon wrote:Who's talking about sacrifices ??? We're talking about improvements !

And isn't it elitist to condamn occasional users only because... they are occasional ? Occasional doesn't mean "let's model a 3D bee, in my freetime... oh I'm bored of it, let's give up". As I said I'm interested to use Blender for working.

I guess that's why commercial softwares are more intuitive... Maybe because they listen to their users intead of yelling at them.
a) You know that Blender was proprietery and commercial software until 2002?
b) Have you ever told Autodesk that their interfaces are "shit" and that they have to change the interface that way that it fits to your needs? And in addition forcing others to change their way of doing things because you don't do it that way... (Would be interesting to hear the answer to such a request... *giggles*)

So if you want to use Blender which is free software (free like in free speech and not like free beer) for work and need a different interface you've got the following options (to shorten the flamewar):

a) Grab the sources and make the changes you think that are needed yourself. Perhaps even make a fullblown fork.
b) Since you want to use Blender for work: What are you willing to pay to implement those changes? Give out a bounty, make a great, apropriate donation to the Blender Foundation or both - if it works...
c) Grab a manual and learn how to use Blender.
d) Search an apropriate tool.

kAinStein
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:08 pm

Post by kAinStein » Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:52 pm

Marianne wrote:oktodindon, calm down...

why does it always have to turn into a flame war? :cry:
Because people come in here telling that all is done wrong (because it might not be right for them) instead of making detailed, well-thought proposals and putting some effort in backing them up (mockups, detailed descriptions, etc.).
I'd just like someone to explain me why do checkboxes, buttons and radio buttons have to look the same?

and why can't big bunches of radio buttons can't be turned into a combo box?

I don't think these proposals are bad? Yet people avoid talking about them, the discussion always turns on the bad proposals!
Yep. That's true. That radio button/ checkbox thing would be an improvement and I also question myself why it wasn't implemented in the main tree.

oktodindon
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:46 am

Post by oktodindon » Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:47 pm

a) You know that Blender was proprietery and commercial software until 2002?
And nobody knew this software.
b) Have you ever told Autodesk that their interfaces are "shit" and that they have to change the interface that way that it fits to your needs? And in addition forcing others to change their way of doing things because you don't do it that way... (Would be interesting to hear the answer to such a request... *giggles*)
Autodesk's interfaces are not perfect, but at least they are enough intuitive to permit me to do something without reading a line of manual.
a) Grab the sources and make the changes you think that are needed yourself. Perhaps even make a fullblown fork.
b) Since you want to use Blender for work: What are you willing to pay to implement those changes? Give out a bounty, make a great, apropriate donation to the Blender Foundation or both - if it works...
c) Grab a manual and learn how to use Blender.
d) Search an apropriate tool.
I have no other choice than c) and d).
"And in addition forcing others to change their way of doing things because you don't do it that way..." <= doesn't it sound like : "Well people listen. You are used to intuitive UIs ? We have the solution ! Get this software for free and change all your way of doing things ! But first, you'll have to read carefully our neverending manual !"
Why are you ignoring my earlier argument ??? Isn't it incontestable ??
And for the b), I give money for a product I like, not in hope to have a product I like. I didn't chose to be a free software developer... Of course I'm thankful to them for what they do, but I'm not into this wonderful free software ideology.
Because people come in here telling that all is done wrong (because it might not be right for them) instead of making detailed, well-thought proposals and putting some effort in backing them up (mockups, detailed descriptions, etc.).
As said earlier, there are plenty (= 100% of them) of 3D softwares which use the same conventions. Just make Blender fit the same conventions and it will be allright. I don't think I need to make mockups to draw tabs, checkboxes, buttons with icons or text... Just open any software and you'll have a clue. Even Silo and its refined UI with no icons at all, is much more intuitive than Blender !

Why don't you want to admit that ? Why do you always give your experienced-user arguments to counter this fact and think you are superior than "occasional" users or new users ? If Blender don't make new users to come, it won't last very long (as soon as all experts will die or give up 3D...).

LetterRip
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:03 am

Post by LetterRip » Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:15 pm

XSI - Maya - 3DS - C4D - Houdini - Silo - Modo - Lightwave
Pretty much none of them use the same conventions for all but a trivial amount of things - there is some knowledge portability - however the only one that might be considered close to intuitive is Silo and that still takes tutorials or manuals to learn.

Blender is arguably slightly less intuitive in some respects the only significant one being what mouse button is used for selection and that there is not a context menu associated witha mouse button, and a few non standard key-shortcuts.

Also the new 'ribbons' interface being adopted by MS Office is a fairly close copy of blender buttons.
Why don't you want to admit that ? Why do you always give your experienced-user arguments to counter this fact and think you are superior than "occasional" users or new users ?
A interface for a professional tool should first be designed to be efficient for a 'well trained user'. This doesn't mean that changes cannot be made to improve ease of learning - indeed the next release after 2.43 will focus on extreme customization so that users familiar with other packages will be able to have a faster and easier learning curve.
If Blender don't make new users to come, it won't last very long (as soon as all experts will die or give up 3D...).
Within a few years Blender is likely to be the 3rd most used 3D software behind Maya and 3DS Max. Our growth rate is phenomenal. Your predictions of demise are rather ridiculous.

LetterRip
Last edited by LetterRip on Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

nemyax
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 12:34 pm

Post by nemyax » Thu Jan 11, 2007 1:54 pm

oktodindon wrote: As said earlier, there are plenty (= 100% of them) of 3D softwares which use the same conventions. Just make Blender fit the same conventions and it will be allright.
Fire up Houdini and see how many of the "conventions" you can spot.
The terminology difference is not the biggest problem with the Blender UI. In my opinion, the following issues are more serious.
Obsolete widget set. Blender is missing some of the widget types found in modern GUI toolkits. Some existing widget types are used inconsistently (toggle buttons), and some are hard to use (numbuts). There have been requests for adopting a standard GUI toolkit, but Blender would probably do better to implement a toolkit of its own that would provide conventional usability and also take it further (like Houdini does).
Limited context sensitivity. Using context-sensitive menus for controls would speed up the workflow and reduce header menus. For example, the ipo editor would be a much smarter tool if you could right-click a channel name or a selection of keys and perform an action on it.
Fixed hotkeys. But that is slated for change after 2.43.

LetterRip
Posts: 0
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 7:03 am

Post by LetterRip » Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:00 pm

- As said in a previous thread, starting in a 3D view, and proposing a multiple viewport layout with only one click / one shortcut.
Why? Silo for instance doesn't start in a multiple viewport layout, nor does ZBrush.
Making the buttons much bigger, give concrete and accessible names to them (names which don't need to wait 2 sec for the tooltip), and show 3D navigation tools and gizmos clearly on the workspace, and not only in shortcuts.
Blenders button size is fairly standard from my experience in other applications. What 'concrete names' are you looking for them to have? Reducing the tooltip time would be worthwhile. Not sure what you mean by '3D navigation tools' - do you mean a zoom/pan/orbit buttons in the interface? I tend to agree that is a good idea - they actually exist in the code already for pan and orbit and were in blender 2.25 but got dropped early on in Blenders opensource history.
As Gustav said, removing Toogle Buttons to make them checkboxes or radiobuttons.
Presumably this will happen, though not for 2.43
Put more space between buttons (like in typography, the eye need space to make the brain feel comfortable), make true big tabs and not tab-buttons
Please provide a mockup of what you mean.
Making layers as all other softwares represent layers, not a bunch of agglomerated little 3x3 pixels squares.
Different approaches to layer management are under consideration - why not provide screenshots of ones you feel are well done, and point out their benefits?
Making a true timeline
Again screenshots and descriptions would be useful - as far as existing users are concerned it is a 'true timeline' - so be explicit about additional functionality you desire.
Adding context menus
What do you mean by context menus explicitly? Ie that the space menu changes based on mode as it does now? Or something else?
Etc...
Etc isn't particularly useful.




You asked,
Why can we find thousands times more of experts of commercial softwares than Blender experts ?
Blender has only recently had a feature set that is comparable to other commercial software especially for modeling, rendering and more recently animating. It has only provided superior and unique functionally quite recently as well (Ie fluid simulation and LSCM and ABF++ UV unwrapping).
Because Blender has a huge problem in its UI... It can do what others can do, it's free, it should be the n°1. But it's not. Why ?
As noted above - only recently has it achieved near feature parity (It still has some notable lacks such as volumetric flame and smoke and ngons, and some other stuff, but things that many 3D artists can comfortably live without or compensate for...). The other half of the equation is adoption time. Only since Orange and Siggraph has Blender been getting exposure among professional artists to any significant extent. A substantial number (probably a large majority) of 3D artists have still not even heard of Blender. Unless a professional user of another 3D package plans to start their own studio or do freelance work and doesn't own a license to a major package there is not much incentive to adopt Blender. Ie the software they already own and are experienced with is 'free' for them in their current situation.

LetterRip

nemyax
Posts: 0
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 12:34 pm

Post by nemyax » Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:51 pm

LetterRip wrote:
Making a true timeline
Again screenshots and descriptions would be useful - as far as existing users are concerned it is a 'true timeline' - so be explicit about additional functionality you desire.
I think he means a timeline where you can select, move, copy and paste keys, as in other animation software. This is indeed extremely useful.

joeri
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2003 6:41 pm
Contact:

Post by joeri » Thu Jan 11, 2007 2:54 pm

oktodindon wrote: PS: sorry for the bragging thing, but you asked me to do it.
That's Okay, I didn't take you for an idiot.
But yes you discribed exactly the line of work I predicted you would be in. And yes for this area Blender is not the right tool. Lots of improvements could be made to fit better into this group. But blender is opensource, they don't have paying customers to force a need to expand into that area of users.

Blender is pretty much a do-it-yourself kit.
Any need for change or function or feature is something you are going to have to organize yourself. Telling the group of developers who already found their own spot of developing on blender don't really need any advice on what they should be doing. If they do you'd see a survey.
Ofcourse all suggestions are welcome and tortured to see the importance of them, but as far as I've been around blender (that's almost 11 years now, I was one of the co-owners of NeoGeo, the animation studio that developed blender) I've never seen much shocking new ideas on these forums. Most of the ideas are; hé such and such do it this way, why don't you implement that into blender?
And nobody knew this software.
I did.
Autodesk's interfaces are not perfect, but at least they are enough intuitive to permit me to do something without reading a line of manual.
Interesting area of users. Not current focus of blender (I think). It's a) (small) movie studios. b) total neewbies. Any other area needs a frontman with a vision and be able to guide developers towards that vision.
They spend their lives on determining what's intuitive and what is not.
Hmmm. That's an opinion. According to Xerox research a mouse was never going to be usefull. These notions on intuitive, usability etc change very often and are targeted at a certain group. Usable for who? There is nothing intuitive to ctrl-c ctrl-v.
UI design is a science. I don't have the keys of the truth, but average has. Every 3D software in this world, XSI - Maya - 3DS - C4D - Houdini - Silo - Modo - Lightwave, use the SAME kind of UI because it's been APPROVED by MILLIONS of people over the world.
I think you get your facts a bit wrong here. There are not millions of people using 3d software in the world. creating 3d is a very highend highlevel type of craft. Mostly done as engineering.
And you want to make me believe that Blender and his unique UI is better than all the others ??
At least we got you considering it as an entity. ITS UI was non overlapping long before macromedia started using it. It uses 3 mouse buttons long before there was osx. It was hotkey driven long before final-cut-pro released a special keyboard with printed hotkeys on it. "Better" is relative to target group.
So it's ok... Keep your nice elite software, your nice elite mind and your nice elite blender users.
3d software is very expensive and only by change it's now freely available for the masses because of blender. It's even arguable that Maya started their PLE because of blender. Yes that creates an urge for low level and mid level users to be able to actualy use it...

I find it debatable as to why other user groups come with more excellent work than the blender base. The dislike towards the Gui could very well be one of the reasons, max just looks like a windows application, so it must be easier to use, right? ( I doubt any newbee will learn how to create a short by looking at the max interface. )
On the other hand, most 3d creative jobs ask for max, or maya specialists, so why spend time learning blender? When you are serious about your career an investment in commercial software is not odd.
Just as you are not going to learn go-life when dreamweaver is the preferd application among employers. Or learn Quark when most studios are switching to InDesign. But don't come tell me they are all the same thanks to there marvelous Gui. It took the team of dtp-ers at my work more then a month to switch (yes on profesional level) and the Gui was the lowest priority as to why the switch was made.

elander
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:30 pm

Post by elander » Thu Jan 11, 2007 4:18 pm

oktodindon wrote:Every 3D software in this world, XSI - Maya - 3DS - C4D - Houdini - Silo - Modo - Lightwave, use the SAME kind of UI because it's been APPROVED by MILLIONS of people over the world. So "my" improvements are improvements for MILLIONS of people.
oktodindon i do think you are an imbecile.

First what you are saying isn't even true. There are great differences in the use of all those applications, including the way the mouse is used, how to select objects, etc. Any user would be confused when navigating from one application to another.

Second, in your own words the Blender interface is bad because it doesn't follow every single detail of your selection of "good" applications. So in your own way you are being close minded and elitist idea of what a ui should be. That's the only argument you have presented and the one you keep repeating all the time.

Blender is has a big number of users so it doesn't fall behind any of the apllications you mention. It uses many features that are similar to other programs and it's evolution is proof of that. But it also has it's own filosophy which worked for it's users so why should it be turned into an harder to use aplication just to make it more like the commercial applications from the elitsist list you made? You don't ever consider or discuss the consequences to those that already use Blender for years.

Why does Blender has to follow YOUR elitist perspective and copy the uis you like instead of trying to be creative and innovate to create a ui that is good for the casual user without sacrificing the users that are happy the way things work? Again you don't bother to research and provide arguments for the sake of experienced users and instead rely on trolling and immature attacks.
oktodindon wrote:So it's ok... Keep your nice elite software, your nice elite mind and your nice elite blender users.
Long life to Blender.
Is it being elitist to want to know the difference between imbeciles and trolls with a close mind who think everything that doesn't come from their favorite application is crap and those who actualy care to understand and inform themselves? I don't think so.

kAinStein
Posts: 63
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:08 pm

Post by kAinStein » Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:33 pm

oktodindon wrote:And nobody knew this software.
Really?! Interesting that there were enough people to raise 100,000 euros in a very short period of time to buy the Blender source code and make it free software. Or did you mean YOU didn't know Blender? You are always projecting your point of view to the whole mankind in exceeding exaggerations! I'm beginning to think that you just got what you wanted: One more silly flame war...
Autodesk's interfaces are not perfect, but at least they are enough intuitive to permit me to do something without reading a line of manual.
You didn't get the point. You are coming here telling everyone that Blender has a shitty interface and demanding that it has to be changed (period - you don't make clear proposals what as to changed and in what way), just because YOU don't like it. I don't like 3D Studio Max or its interface - am I going to tell Autodesk that they should change it in a Blender interface? Well, I guess Autodesk would like to do it - if I can pay it...
I have no other choice than c) and d).
You've got your answer, I guess.
"And in addition forcing others to change their way of doing things because you don't do it that way..." <= doesn't it sound like : "Well people listen. You are used to intuitive UIs ? We have the solution ! Get this software for free and change all your way of doing things ! But first, you'll have to read carefully our neverending manual !"
Think about your demand. But thinking doesn't seem to be your strength. Anyone can use the tool he wants. Nobody's forcing you to use Blender. If it doesn't fit your needs then search something else. and if it's something commercial? So be it. You said that you do 3D for work and not for fun: Then it's an investment in a tool - like it would be in a new computer, a hammer or whatever you need to do your work.
Why are you ignoring my earlier argument ??? Isn't it incontestable ??
You've got ignored every point made and the requests to make some clear proposals and backing them up with mockups and the like.
And for the b), I give money for a product I like, not in hope to have a product I like.
Then make a bounty or hire some coders. Blender is free software under the GPL - not freeware. There's a difference! You can grab the sources and do whatever you like unless you distribute it closed-source... You want changes? Put effort in it! Be it in money or in work. No one gets paid for what he does and no one is forced to obey your will.
I didn't chose to be a free software developer... Of course I'm thankful to them for what they do, but I'm not into this wonderful free software ideology.
Yeah... Whatever... And the free software developers are just here to satisfy your personal needs, of course!
As said earlier, there are plenty (= 100% of them) of 3D softwares which use the same conventions.
The last one that claimed that has been proved wrong - search the thread on the forum. Those applications are quite different in many ways.
Just make Blender fit the same conventions and it will be allright. I don't think I need to make mockups to draw tabs, checkboxes, buttons with icons or text... Just open any software and you'll have a clue. Even Silo and its refined UI with no icons at all, is much more intuitive than Blender !
Many people in here think that the changes you demand aren't needed. So what? Who cares what you say when you're not making clear proposals?
Why don't you want to admit that ? Why do you always give your experienced-user arguments to counter this fact and think you are superior than "occasional" users or new users ?
No one in here claimed such. You are twisting words and start more and more to sound like a moron.
If Blender don't make new users to come, it won't last very long (as soon as all experts will die or give up 3D...).
Yeah... Blender only exists since yesterday and nobody knows it... Whatever!

BeBraw
Posts: 0
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 4:14 pm

Post by BeBraw » Thu Jan 11, 2007 8:06 pm

If Blender don't make new users to come, it won't last very long (as soon as all experts will die or give up 3D...).


Because of its Open Source nature it is likely that Blender will outlast its proprietary competitors. Even if Blender's development stalled for some reason, the source would still be there.

In case proprietary product encountered problems and it was not open sourced, the users would be forced to seek an alternate product.

pinhead_66
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 10:09 am
Location: Belgium

Post by pinhead_66 » Thu Jan 11, 2007 9:05 pm

can we all please calm down a bit please.

everybody's on his/her high horse again, so this thread isn't going anywhere anymore.

maybe part of the problem in discussions like this is that different people have a different idea of what a GUI and or interface is.

when people have different ideas concerning that, mockups can help greatly to make your point

please check out the wiki to read up on all the thinking work that has allready been done on GUI-redesign.

In the past, people that have made extensive proposals (with or without mockups) have greatly contributed and helped the develpment of blender.


I didn't chose to be a free software developer... Of course I'm thankful to them for what they do, but I'm not into this wonderful free software ideology.
then what are you doing here? only wanting the benefits without any effort , not even trying to learn and understand how and why it works the way it works, comes leachy over to me. sorry

Post Reply