Further Interface Improvement proposal - NEW: UV Editing

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

Moderators: jesterKing, stiv

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Fri Dec 26, 2003 2:24 pm

Hi, thanks for the comment. I am still working on expanding the proposal. Infact I am going to upload new stuff very soon! I'll update this post each time I include some new stuff.

thorwil
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 10:30 am

Post by thorwil » Fri Dec 26, 2003 4:32 pm

This is currently page 4 of 3.
Post o see wha happens ...

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Sat Dec 27, 2003 10:50 pm

I have added two new sections today. The Edit Buttons and Constraint Sliders.

Constraint Sliders (http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/Constraints.htm)
Edit buttons (http://www.shadeless.dk/ui/editbuttons.htm)

Please comment!

slikdigit
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Northampton, MA (US)

Post by slikdigit » Sat Dec 27, 2003 11:49 pm

Hi Monkeyboi, here's my comment:
I like (as you know) sliders in the 3dview. I also like named groups of sliders so you can turn off or on their display (per bone works well, the names are already there)
My only comment is that constraint channel should be saveable per action- it makes more sense in the NLA than having to do all your constraining "top level" which sometimes invovles duplicating actions into two, delating all the constraint keys in one and all other keys in the other.
It can get complex doing this for some complex animations that have lots of constraint keying, which happens frequently if you're animating a character interacting with multiple objects.
I like your edit buttons screen, but since I have the preference level shortcut->toolbox->buttons window when working, I might not be the best critic of this over someone who prefers working off the buttons window.
imo the most needing of redesign is the materials / textures window right now, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't address the edit buttons too.
ps I've found the best way to deal with the current design is to have a material editing screen with two vertical panels, one for mat and one for texture, and a large 3d window to the left, taking about half the screen.

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Sun Dec 28, 2003 3:00 am

Hi Slikdigit, thanks for your comment!
My only comment is that constraint channel should be saveable per action- it makes more sense in the NLA than having to do all your constraining "top level" which sometimes invovles duplicating actions into two, delating all the constraint keys in one and all other keys in the other.
Let me see if I understand you correctly: you would like constraints to work like datablocks which you can simply load for all the bones you want to follow an action, am I right? If so, that is a very good idea! It is a huge hasstle having to go through each finger bone and type in the same constraint settings again and again.

slikdigit
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Northampton, MA (US)

Post by slikdigit » Sun Dec 28, 2003 3:14 am

hmmm. I'm not sure I understand. I'll try to explain myself again and see if we're saying the same thing or not:
right now when you add constraint keys, you can 'visualize' them in the action window, and they appear as part of the action. However, when you mix actions in the NLA, the constraints are not applied to the armature; only the constraint in the 'top level' action are, not the ones in the NLA strips. That could be what you're talking about, but I'm not sure.
Note: developement has been going at such a feverish rate that its possible that this is already dealt with; I've been modeling and texturing a lot more than animating recently, and its been a while since I've played with tuhoppu, too.

gloume
Posts: 0
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2003 1:44 am
Contact:

Post by gloume » Mon Dec 29, 2003 5:17 am

Rather than create a new proposal, I'd like to propose an idea for your proposal ;) In addition to the horizontal/vertical alignment of panels in the buttons window, add an option for horizontal/vertical layout of buttons within all the panels. I find that with the static layout of buttons within the panels the vertical panel alignment requires too much horizontal space, particularly on small screens. Your new button layout would lend itself well to this option. Have the two column layout be the horizontal button layout, while the vertical layout would make the panels taller with a single column of buttons. One disadvantage might be more scrolling in the vertical button layout, but I still think its worth considering.

slikdigit
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Northampton, MA (US)

Post by slikdigit » Fri Jan 02, 2004 3:59 am

Hi Monkeyboi, I don't know if this comes under the heading of 'interface' but it does effect consistancy. This in regards to armatures and object types- right now armature is confined to deforming meshes- shouldn't it effect any 'point' based geometry- in other words:
all point based geometries:
mesh
3d curves
nurbs surfaces
maybe even metaball- the center of the metaball is the point
get deformation groups by name, same as a mesh
parenting these objects to the armature result in the same kind of deformation a mesh has- based on the point group names and their values.
I don't include 2d curves because they won't be able to follow the bone in 3d space- an alternative would be to allow this, withing the planar limitation of the curve- a bit like a projection.
What do you think? Its an obvious idea, but does it belong in an interface discussion, or a functionality discussion? The two overlap in some ways.

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Sat Jan 03, 2004 3:37 am

Hi everyone, sorry for the slow reply.

hmmm. I'm not sure I understand. I'll try to explain myself again and see if we're saying the same thing or not:
right now when you add constraint keys, you can 'visualize' them in the action window, and they appear as part of the action. However, when you mix actions in the NLA, the constraints are not applied to the armature; only the constraint in the 'top level' action are, not the ones in the NLA strips. That could be what you're talking about, but I'm not sure.
Note: developement has been going at such a feverish rate that its possible that this is already dealt with; I've been modeling and texturing a lot more than animating recently, and its been a while since I've played with tuhoppu, too.

Ok so what you are saying is that constraints should be saved inside actions? So that you could blend between an FK and an IK motion with the NLA editor, right? Or have I still not understood? Anyway, that would kindof be cool. But this is more of a plain feature request than an interface related thing. You should suggest that to some programmers!


Rather than create a new proposal, I'd like to propose an idea for your proposal In addition to the horizontal/vertical alignment of panels in the buttons window, add an option for horizontal/vertical layout of buttons within all the panels. I find that with the static layout of buttons within the panels the vertical panel alignment requires too much horizontal space, particularly on small screens. Your new button layout would lend itself well to this option. Have the two column layout be the horizontal button layout, while the vertical layout would make the panels taller with a single column of buttons. One disadvantage might be more scrolling in the vertical button layout, but I still think its worth considering.
Hi, I'm sorry, having read your post through several times I still don't understand. Surely, spacewise, it never would make a difference how the buttons were orginised inside inside the individual panels.. The panels are always the same sizes both in vertical and horisontal modes. Try to explain a bit more, maybe with a mockup (doesn't have to be anything special, just to communicate what you mean). Thanks.

Hi Monkeyboi, I don't know if this comes under the heading of 'interface' but it does effect consistancy. This in regards to armatures and object types- right now armature is confined to deforming meshes- shouldn't it effect any 'point' based geometry- in other words:
all point based geometries:
mesh
3d curves
nurbs surfaces
Yes that would be really nice! It seems very bizzare that you cannot do character animation with NURBS in Blender at all. This will certinately have to be adressed wen Nurbana is integrated. This is beyond the scope of my proposal though since this is new functionality, but throw it in the feature requests!

arangel
Posts: 0
Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2003 2:54 pm
Location: Brasília - Brazil
Contact:

Post by arangel » Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:09 pm

Great proposals for Morph targets, monkey boy!

Alexandre Rangel

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

Post by kAinStein » Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:22 pm

For the case that I haven't told:
The proposal for the constraints is really good - but to rearrange the edit buttons in the way you suggested does really rock! I felt quite uncomfortable with them after working with the new UI (though I like the new UI) because they were so messy! But I didn't know how they could be arranged in a better way! You've found it! You're the man, Monkeyboi!

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

Post by kAinStein » Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:29 pm

And what else I would like to see, would be the normal behaviour of a scrollbar (in the file browser for example) like I am used to - means: If I click on the background of the scrollbar then the bar moves down or up, depending on where I clicked. Additionally: It would be also nice to be able to use the PageDown and PageUp keys to scroll in the file browser. This would make things much easier without losing consistency inside of Blender (in fact it's even more consistent with today UIs in general and I wonder why it hasn't been done before).

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Wed Jan 07, 2004 11:38 pm

Hi kAinStein, thanks for the reply! About the file browser I think it is a good idea that the scroll bar shoud have a more normal behavior. The usage og page up and down is a good idea. These things should not only be implemented here, but also in the Text Editor to keep consistancy and also make browsing huge scipts easier.

I'm glad you like the Edit Buttons.

Monkeyboi
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Nov 26, 2002 1:24 pm
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Contact:

Post by Monkeyboi » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:27 pm

New proposal, this time about improving the render window:

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

Image


Please read the proposal and comment!


-William

EDIT: DUE TO FORUM BUG
YOU CAN ONLY REACH THE FIFTH PAGE BY CLICKING HERE:http://www.blender.org/modules.php?op=m ... 8&start=60
Last edited by Monkeyboi on Mon Jan 12, 2004 11:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.

slikdigit
Posts: 133
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2002 3:52 am
Location: Northampton, MA (US)

Post by slikdigit » Mon Jan 12, 2004 7:47 pm

Please take into acount that any improvments to the render window not remove the "dispview" option. Though most people don't use it, on some gfx cards under linux (radeon in my case) the renderwindow segfaults blender immeadiatly, And this is not unique. While it is a good suggestion, improving the renderwindow shouldn't kill the render to view.
Is there any way you can see towards integrating your suggestion into both render styles? One quick thought is that the information you see (view dropdown, percent complete and cancel button) could take place of the normal stuff in the 3d view that is containing the render, only while rendering or when displaying the buffer (f11). I don't know if the view code is such that this kind of substitution is possible.

Post Reply