kid_tripod wrote:I'm not convinced customisation is necessary, and I note NaN moved from the darker tones pre2.0 to the current scheme with 2.0.
Hi, like I mentioned in the first post, I don't have any intentions of forcing anything on anyone. I made this customised version for myself, for the reasons I outlined. If others like it, then they can add the code into Blender, probably as a user option. Whether or not you're
convinced customisation is necessary doesn't really matter, since by the looks of this thread, a reasonable amount of people think it is, and they can add the options for it to the code.
I don't know where this myth of graphics people all work in darkened rooms comes from, because the people I know can't stand it.
Refuting a 'myth' with your own personal experience is not very scientific either. Whether or not all
graphics people work in such an environment isn't relevant either, as long as there is a reasonable amount of people who do and would like a darker scheme; thus they have the freedom to add the option to the code.
Sorry, you touched a nerve, but I've not seen any other modern pro-3D with such a dark UI, in fact the really good ones seem to either use native widgets (which I'm not necessarily advocating) or have a scheme equivalent to Blender's current one. Only the old generation ones like Lightwave, MAX and Softimage 3|D seem to be sticking with it, but the rest have totally moved on to better things.
Looks like I did touch a nerve!
Actually in MAX's case, from the old 3D Studio, then to MAX, up until version 4 you could only use the Windows default colour scheme. In version 4, they added an option for a darker colour scheme (screenshots here @ p.28
), so it's hard to attribute that to a hang-over from older times. ZBrush uses a darker colour scheme
too. Outside of 3D software, all Discreet's high-end compositing/VFX packages use dark schemes
, as does Shake
, as well as Eyeon's Digital Fusion
. You also mentioned "why run that on OS X at all?", but Apple's pro graphics programs such as DVD Studio Pro
and Final Cut Pro
use darker colour schemes in lieu of Aqua too.
Photoshop, uses the native scheme available, and no one complains. Maya - last time I looked it wasn't very dark either.
Both Photoshop and Maya use native widgets, allowing people to use dark colour schemes if they choose, just by adjusting the OS colours.
I think making the whole program too 'serious' with the buttons and all would be bad.
So then it's just one personal preference against another. In that case, why should others be denied their personal preference? Especially considering that having a more professional, serious looking interface will help in getting Blender accepted in industry as a reliable and competent tool.
In fact going through trolltech's website of late I found a thing by Duboi, who did the post work on Amelie, and them porting their paint application from Irix/Motif to Qt.
Now if people all want dark interfaces why run that on OS X at all?
I read the article, and I can't find anything in it to do with the merits of lighter or darker colour schemes. If you're implying that the reason they are running it on Mac OS X is because of the light interface, I think that's more than a bit of a stretch; they use it on NT, Linux and Irix too. The point of the article is showing how they easily acheived cross platform portability by using QT. QT uses semi-native widgets, so of course the Mac OS X version will be using a light, Aqua-style colour scheme.
The truth is graphics people like lighter interfaces, and computer people like darker interfaces.
Well that's quite a sweeping generalisation. 'Graphics people' and 'computer people' are people, not stereotypes that have consistent preferences in colour schemes and nor can they be neatly divided into little demographics either. If that comment was meant to be some sort of dig saying "You're just a geeky coder and don't understand what artists want", then it's misdirected because I'm not a programmer, I'm a graphic designer.