PDA

View Full Version : Unification of Terminology



spherical
02-20-2014, 10:23 PM
We have Unified Sampling. How about Unified Naming?

Increasingly, "Specularity" is being used in its actual sense; that being how much a surface bounces back its surroundings, as opposed to scattering/absorbing it.

Yet, the Specularity kludge that was developed long ago as a fake to mimic Reflectivity, but only that of lights—so as to cut render times, survives; even in these later versions. We have "Reflectivity", still, as a separate setting, and for those reasons they can remain separate, but they're named wrong. Nodes sometimes have only "Specularity". Others have only "Reflectivity", which acts the same way but is named incorrectly, because fake Specularity is still hanging around. Thus, continuing to propagate the confusion.

How about changing the label of the current "Specularity" control, that is fake highlights from lights, and calling it that which it is: "PseudoSpec"? Then, "Specularity" can be used everywhere else (Reflectivity should be renamed anywhere it is used) and always mean the same thing.

Who's with me?! (Bonus points for knowing what that is from.)

prometheus
03-18-2014, 04:39 AM
well...canīt say much about that since I know to little of that area and havenīt researched it.

Though unification of terminology that is needed... shows in other areas, and some probably related to the split model/layout approach...this is a sample, not quite the same as the more complex stuff with reflection and specularity.

Heré is no consistency...
In modeler..create a box or create a ball, now swith to layout and use modeler tools for creating almost the same thing and they are called create cube and create sphere, itīs only confusing and not a proper naming either.

a box is attributed to be something that should contain or hold something, and a ball is attributed with something usually bouncing, If I were in charge..I would discard the ball and box naming and instead use the more proper geometric attribute, sphere and cube...until they start to be something else where it is up to your choice for renaming in the scene.

They can then continue to adjust shortcut keys if possible for consistency between layout and modeler...The "F8" should be the same for accessing surface presets in layout as well as in modeler.



Michael

hrgiger
03-23-2014, 11:11 AM
How about we stop calling it the bevel tool? You know since its actually an extrusion tool with an inset.

prometheus
03-23-2014, 12:29 PM
How about we stop calling it the bevel tool? You know since its actually an extrusion tool with an inset.

So what should we call the extrude tool then?

hrgiger
03-23-2014, 02:14 PM
So what should we call the extrude tool then?

Well we have bevel, extrude, multishift, smooth shift, extend... its about time they get rid of redundancies in modeler. Now we have chamfer in modeler for actual beveling. Ideally they should combine chamfer and fillets(rounding) into a single tool.

prometheus
03-23-2014, 03:23 PM
Well we have bevel, extrude, multishift, smooth shift, extend... its about time they get rid of redundancies in modeler. Now we have chamfer in modeler for actual beveling. Ideally they should combine chamfer and fillets(rounding) into a single tool.

sort of agree to some extent, but itīs a matter of unification of tools to some single tool doing all those
operations and not just merely a name change.

extrude and bevel operates in different ways, and bevel keeps itīs bevel setting for faster appliance
on areas with the same bevel if that is needed, and extrude got some stuff bevel donīt, same with extender and chamfer, a multitool could actually make it less inefficient since it will not have that
tools settings in memory for a bevel performance for instance, you would have to check specific checkboxes to use it as a bevel tool instead of extrude tool etc, so I am not convinced it will be smoother
to work with a multitool.

Michael

hrgiger
03-23-2014, 06:43 PM
Well I would just throw the LW extrude tool out, I would actually prefer it to be more like the bevel tool which should allow extending of geometry and scaling (inset) although preferably with handles. Extrude tool actually allows divisions on extended area which seems mostly pointless as its not being rounded or curved in any manner with an extend operation. I'm not suggesting they put everything into one tool but chamfering and rounding are pretty much doing the same thing just the number of divisions is changing. Bevel is limited due to the fact that it will only bevel one polygon at a time at which point you go to multishift which will allow operations on grouped polygons. Smooth Shift and extrude are more or less the same tool. There's just a lot of redundancy there just to do a single task and that is extruding a face (or group of faces) out.

As far as the name of the tool, I would hope that with any cleanup or restructuring of modeling tools that they would name tools for their proper functions. Bevel as its currently being used isn't really very apt for its functionality.

prometheus
03-23-2014, 08:53 PM
Well I would just throw the LW extrude tool out, I would actually prefer it to be more like the bevel tool which should allow extending of geometry and scaling (inset) although preferably with handles. Extrude tool actually allows divisions on extended area which seems mostly pointless as its not being rounded or curved in any manner with an extend operation. I'm not suggesting they put everything into one tool but chamfering and rounding are pretty much doing the same thing just the number of divisions is changing. Bevel is limited due to the fact that it will only bevel one polygon at a time at which point you go to multishift which will allow operations on grouped polygons. Smooth Shift and extrude are more or less the same tool. There's just a lot of redundancy there just to do a single task and that is extruding a face (or group of faces) out.

As far as the name of the tool, I would hope that with any cleanup or restructuring of modeling tools that they would name tools for their proper functions. Bevel as its currently being used isn't really very apt for its functionality.


Well multishift isnīt the same essentially as extrude, you canīt extrude out 1 point polyīs with multishift, extrude does that, and multishift is missing divisions, which I use, so a new tool would have to be able to do all that, and keep itīs setting...and be a bevel tool.

And what about the tweak tool:) it extrudes polys, moves elements, unfortunatly it donīt have a shift select multipolygroups, so you can only extrude ony poly at the time.

Michael

hrgiger
03-24-2014, 02:46 AM
Thanks for bringing up another case of bad terminology. :) 1 and 2 point polygons/junk geometry. Technically nothing less then 3 sides can actually be a polygon, at least not in 3D. And LW seems to be the only one that uses them (which doesn't make it a good thing IMO).

prometheus
03-24-2014, 08:38 AM
Thanks for bringing up another case of bad terminology. :) 1 and 2 point polygons/junk geometry. Technically nothing less then 3 sides can actually be a polygon, at least not in 3D. And LW seems to be the only one that uses them (which doesn't make it a good thing IMO).

Yes..I recall there was a discussion about two point polyīs..to be or not to be, benifits or not.

though I havenīt run across any issues with it really, and work a little with them for dynamics,hair guides etc.

So I will leave that discussion open without any good insights on it..or having that much to say about it.

I do think it might be a good Idea to merge some tools, but maybe keep them hidden as legacy, we will only know for sure how such tool will work for us after it has been used a while.

Regarding extrude, I have always found it awkward that you have to flip polys to get it to extrude right in presumed direction, I understand why it does that, but not sure if it is a good way to have the tool operate that way.

Same goes with the lathe tool, not sure...but wouldnīt it be better to call it revolve, almost all other 3d apps seem to name it as such, I am not sure either about how curves are drawn, depending on how you start your curve, it will either flip the lathe, or it will create it correctly...maybe it would be better of to ignore where the curve starts? (curve head and end) the other option is of course to always be aware of where the curve starts to perform correctly, for newbies that will not click though.

Michael

hrgiger
03-24-2014, 08:49 AM
yeah Im not saying theyre not useful in LW. I just question why LW is the only one to use them when everyone else gets by with the same functionality without them.

To be honest, I havent used the extrude tool for as long as I can remember, always used the incorrectly named bevel tool instead. Funny you say that about the extrude tool and flipped normals because after this thread last night I tried extrude and couldnt understand why it was flipping the normals.

Im confident that LW3DG will fix some of the tool issues in modeler moving forward. Other then a few issues I have with the new modeler tools in 11.5, I find them to be fairly refreshing compared to the older modeling tools.

prometheus
03-24-2014, 09:01 AM
yeah Im not saying theyre not useful in LW. I just question why LW is the only one to use them when everyone else gets by with the same functionality without them.

To be honest, I havent used the extrude tool for as long as I can remember, always used the incorrectly named bevel tool instead. Funny you say that about the extrude tool and flipped normals because after this thread last night I tried extrude and couldnt understand why it was flipping the normals.

Im confident that LW3DG will fix some of the tool issues in modeler moving forward. Other then a few issues I have with the new modeler tools in 11.5, I find them to be fairly refreshing compared to the older modeling tools.



yes..always have to flip before extruding, at least if you want to extrude in the poly face normal direction, which in most cases we do, this is also a newbie screw up in your face tool behavior.

things like the extrude and lathe behavior might be technicly correct in the 3d environment, but it is by no means correct in relation to how a user expect it to behave...thus all that confusion.

I like the new modeling tools, I do hope they could activate faster though, they are obviously more complex and thus seem to be somewhat slower to start.
the tweak tool needs a group extend option..like holding shift key and select groups of poly to extend/extrude.

prometheus
03-24-2014, 09:09 AM
some thoughts...
Maybe merge magic bevel within the extrude tool, and fix the issues I mentioned about flipping before extruding..
get rid of the magic bevel name and simply name it extrude but with all other options available also in magic bevel.

Bevel always get me thinking of rounded bevels, so I would enhance it to do round bevels and merge it with options for
chamfering..maybe. and get rid of chamfer.

and do a completly overhaul of rounder :)

Michael

hrgiger
03-24-2014, 11:29 AM
As far as the new tools go, I dont think they are slow to start because they are more complex, I think its because they are working outside of Modelers SDK, at least that would be my theory. For instance tools like the new translate tools that give axis handles arent calling from a 'handle' function within the SDK, theyre functions specific to that tool so Im hoping thats one are they improve. Things like handles should work across modeler but that would most likely involve rewriting all the tools to use that function.