PDA

View Full Version : BUG:Cloning (non-bone) hierarchies and Emitters: +HV panel sizing: pls chk in 2015



jeric_synergy
07-31-2015, 05:02 PM
BUGS? (LW11.6.3)
129098

So I cloned this hierarchy, hoping for an easy time. Instead, several bugs seem to have cropped up. Can someone please check this in 2015?

Surprisingly, HV's were applied to an element of the hierarchy, it was just not the correct element. Also, the parameters were different than the actual desired, but that's neither here nor there now is it? I can see how if the count is off anyway, the routine would apply defaults since it's looking at the wrong object's HV parameters.

Also I noticed you cannot resize the HV panel-- this disappointed me because recently I was pleased to see the effect of resizing the SurfEditor, you can actually see the whole Surface name. I don't think my object names are unreasonably long, but if you could resize the HV panel similar to how the SurfEd resizes, this would not be an issue. (I despise scrolling a list horizontally just to see the whole damn name. This is especially obnoxious for clone names.)

So, bugs or operator error?
++++++++
EDIT:

AND: "Deactivate" in the HV panel doesn't seem to work. It never unbolds the object, AND it even turns an unchecked object back on. It's really the OPPOSITE of "Deactivate"

prometheus
08-01-2015, 04:35 AM
BUGS? (LW11.6.3)
129098

Also I noticed you cannot resize the HV panel-- this disappointed me because recently I was pleased to see the effect of resizing the SurfEditor, you can actually see the whole Surface name. I don't think my object names are unreasonably long, but if you could resize the HV panel similar to how the SurfEd resizes, this would not be an issue. (I despise scrolling a list horizontally just to see the whole damn name. This is especially obnoxious for clone names.)

So, bugs or operator error?
++++++++
EDIT:

AND: "Deactivate" in the HV panel doesn't seem to work. It never unbolds the object, AND it even turns an unchecked object back on. It's really the OPPOSITE of "Deactivate"

I donīt have any issues with lw 11.6.3 for activating or deactivating, seem to work as it should here with hvīs, if you by any change mean the arrow checking, that is not for deactivating.. it is for setting the item to show or not show, not deactivating, only the button deactivate will do that, that is why uncecking any voxel item is still in bold in text and not unbold.
That might be confusing as to what is the difference, the difference is when deactivating it will loose all settings, while show and not show only hide it from rendering.

regarding the hv rezise panel, you have the vertical slider underneath all the items... which means you can slide it to the right to see how long or what the surface name is even if it is very very long, though you are absolutly right..no resize is bad, and they really need to adress window sizing in x-panels, or simply tell us that new css panels are arriving in the future so we might be able to endure until such changes happen.
working with sunsky is a bit of a pain when going back and forth to change stuff...it will crop a lot of sk settings so you would have to close the effect tab and reopen again to make it pop up in
itīs own window.

prometheus
08-01-2015, 04:51 AM
Oops..nevermind my info about verticle sliders, obviously I woke up on the wrong coordinates today, and I also missed that you already mentioned dispise of using sliders like that just to see the whole thing.

jeric_synergy
08-01-2015, 08:59 AM
#aflw +Just got up, but... So, it's STANDARD that when you DEACTIVATE an HV item, the name isn't de-bolded/ghosted like the rest of the unactivated items??? (That would be very stupid.)

I figured it was just something pathological about this particular one, since it was auto-generated (incorrectly) by CLONE HIERARCHY.

Also, neither unchecking it NOR Deactivating it removed it from the VPR display-- it was unkillable. Since it already has problems I wouldn't be surprised if the indexing to it in the internal HV lists was borked and causing these problems.

I'm just going to upgrade to 2015.x today (I wasn't making it to France this year anyway...) so I can see if this problem has persisted. MOST likely it's in the CLONE HIERARCHY routine.

The resize thing should be particularly easy to fix: doesn't the SurfEd panel share code with whatever's displaying HV et al? The SurfEd resizes. Just sayin'. (And pointing out ANOTHER instance of inconsistency in the UI.)

prometheus
08-01-2015, 12:46 PM
#aflw +Just got up, but... So, it's STANDARD that when you DEACTIVATE an HV item, the name isn't de-bolded/ghosted like the rest of the unactivated items??? (That would be very stupid.)

)

Cant recall if it worked the same in lw 9.6 and 10, all I know that it is a difference between deactivate buttons which completly removes all hv settings from any item in the list and consequently makes it de-bolded like other objects not having any hv applied, and the arrow checking which only deactivates the active render state...but still shows that it has hypervoxels attached to them by retaining the bold text.

maybe it should have de-bolded text for more consistency between other stuff, but then you canīt tell which items that is having hv applied and those who does have it applied.

jeric_synergy
08-01-2015, 01:47 PM
maybe it should have de-bolded text for more consistency between other stuff, but then you canīt tell which items that is having hv applied and those who does have it applied.
Not what I mean: if the checkbox is just OFF, the item should remain bolded/non-ghosted. However, if the item is DEACTIVATED, which means the settings are lost anyway, the item label should be de-bolded/ghosted.

That was not the situation in this case: see the last line in post #1.

prometheus
08-01-2015, 02:20 PM
Not what I mean: if the checkbox is just OFF, the item should remain bolded/non-ghosted. However, if the item is DEACTIVATED, which means the settings are lost anyway, the item label should be de-bolded/ghosted.

That was not the situation in this case: see the last line in post #1.

Im not getting it, clearly some misunderstanding here...in your post #1. you say you deactivate...that means deleting all hv properties, and in the image you also have to active objects, that also is checked to be visible?

In my experience...when I deactivate with the deactivate buttons, it will be ghosted and none bold, so if that is what you too would like it to behave, then we are on the same page..and that means it works for me..but it doesnīt work that way for you.
and I am doing this in lw 11.6.3 only, if you have that issue with lw 2015..that is one thing, but if you have it in 11.6.3 also...then it would be strange.

jeric_synergy
08-01-2015, 03:27 PM
The second (incorrectly) active object could not be Deactivated.

Not only that, UNCHECKING IT, while it was highlighted, and hitting DEACTIVATE just CHECKED it-- it did not get Deactivated AND it got re-checked.

(I'm assuming your "to" was supposed to be "two", or better, "2".)

prometheus
08-01-2015, 07:48 PM
The second (incorrectly) active object could not be Deactivated.

Not only that, UNCHECKING IT, while it was highlighted, and hitting DEACTIVATE just CHECKED it-- it did not get Deactivated AND it got re-checked.

(I'm assuming your "to" was supposed to be "two", or better, "2".)

Nope..donīt think so, and I think this becomes more of a spelling lesson rather than solving anything else, where do I mention "to"
quote it and highlight it whith some colors.
maybe you ment this? "so if that is what you too would like it to behave," then it should be "so if that is how you too want it to behave" or " so if that is how you also want it to behave" thatīs the only spelling error in grammatics that I can see.

regarding the topics...I donīt get it what you are getting all wonky, at least I have no issues with it..but thatīs me and not you of course :), can you record this in a session and post on youtube..if possible and if you have the paticence for it?

donīt get caught in spelling errors from me, or we would go on for a long time correcting things, unless you really donīt understand what I am writing.
Iīm gonna hit the sack now ..so see ya tomorrow....By the way, that fraze makes absolutly no sense in swedish, it only sounds like I am violent in the bed...:)

Michael

jeric_synergy
08-01-2015, 07:57 PM
I have no idea what you're saying here.

Look, it wouldn't deactivate. Is that clear enough? Wouldn't turn off, wouldn't go away.

prometheus
08-01-2015, 08:07 PM
I have no idea what you're saying here.

Look, it wouldn't deactivate. Is that clear enough? Wouldn't turn off, wouldn't go away.

obviously the communication between you and me isnīt working...I havenīt talked about misunderstanding that part in understanding that it isnīt working for you the way you describe...you donīt have to clarify that, I know you said it wonīt deactivate.

Just showcase the darn thing on youtube..and it would also become more evident how you go about it.

Maybe I did use the wrong words..maybe I should say, I donīt get it why you should get it all wonky when I donīt...that is if we both use 11.6.3

Michael

prometheus
08-01-2015, 08:20 PM
Follow my lead, and if it works like this, then we have it the same..and I donīt see any issues with it, what I do have an issue with...that is the lousy blending mode they introduced for volumes, which has no proper effect as you can see in the end.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU5tSgM4fOg


I suppose if you have these problems in 11.6.3 that is, it may be because of cloning something that is within some hierarchy.

jeric_synergy
08-01-2015, 10:07 PM
I constructed a test scene to test the general case of "hierarchy with an emitter on the end". Cloned it, worked fine. HV panel doing what it should.

Something about the original problem scene is confusing the Clone routine, on this machine at any rate. Intermittent problems, the hardest to solve.

Whatever it is, it may rear its ugly head again in some more common scenario.

prometheus
08-02-2015, 07:04 AM
, what I do have an issue with...that is the lousy blending mode they introduced for volumes, which has no proper effect as you can see in the end.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU5tSgM4fOg

.

and I did it in a haste, so of course I showcased it wrong, that was the surface mode an also not set up properly with blending groups....so never mind that.

jwiede
08-04-2015, 12:51 PM
if you by any change mean the arrow checking, that is not for deactivating.. it is for setting the item to show or not show, not deactivating

Why isn't there an "eye" icon or equivalent label for the checkbox column, specifically to indicate the checkbox meant visibility not overall activity? Kinda broken to have a checkbox column without a label, IMO, if it represents anything but the "overall on/off switch".

Honestly, this whole LW mess of having checkboxes for one meaning, bolding the entries for another meaning, etc. creates such needless confusion. Just have one column of checks for whether active, and another column for visibility. Ridiculous and inconsistent to use two different visual approaches to represent binary states within the same table or really, at all.

jeric_synergy
08-04-2015, 07:35 PM
Why isn't there an "eye" icon or equivalent label for the checkbox column, specifically to indicate the checkbox meant visibility not overall activity? Kinda broken to have a checkbox column without a label, IMO, if it represents anything but the "overall on/off switch".

Honestly, this whole LW mess of having checkboxes for one meaning, bolding the entries for another meaning, etc. creates such needless confusion. Just have one column of checks for whether active, and another column for visibility. Ridiculous and inconsistent to use two different visual approaches to represent binary states within the same table or really, at all.
Agree soooooooooo much. Throw in "non-resizing panels" and I'm SCREAMING with agreement.

I >TRULY< suspect the devs test sets are filled with objects named "Foo.lwo" and "Bar.lwo'. It continually pisses me off that even SLIGHTLY more verbose names, eg "Kangaroo_red_13.lwo" require scrolling horizontally. That is b.s. man, especially after all these years.

HV is still listed as "3.0", which seems to have been the state for a long time. I wish at least it had the slightly updated panels, such as FFX, so it would be more usable. For god's sake, there's not even any RMB functionality in the list. WTH? Even updating it to use the panel code of FFX would be better than nothing.

prometheus
08-05-2015, 08:17 AM
Why isn't there an "eye" icon or equivalent label for the checkbox column, specifically to indicate the checkbox meant visibility not overall activity? Kinda broken to have a checkbox column without a label, IMO, if it represents anything but the "overall on/off switch".

Honestly, this whole LW mess of having checkboxes for one meaning, bolding the entries for another meaning, etc. creates such needless confusion. Just have one column of checks for whether active, and another column for visibility. Ridiculous and inconsistent to use two different visual approaches to represent binary states within the same table or really, at all.

I havenīt experienced it to be such a Huge issue, but anyway I agree with you with the eye icon...it is an issue for newbies and if you are not custom to how it works..but less so for those using it a lot I guess.

I can also say that what I have said before might actually be wrong depending on how you look at it, the arrow do in fact deactivate it for rendering, and thus could be said to be inactive in scene, while it keeps itīs settings allowing for further tweakings, thus active for further changes..while the deactivate button simply removes everything to a none state.

the Hv panel needs to recognize which Items are active as having applied hypervoxels, as well as checkbox or display to show active and non active for being renderable or non renderable at the same time, and also display all other items that are not having any hypervoxels on them, so I think that is way they have it the way they do now..a better way to do it, well ..please showcase how if anyone knows better ways.

yes ...inconsistency perhaps, but thats how it has been..and I reckon they have a load of other inconsistency issues to deal with, how they put this topic up for priority is left for the future to tell..but I think I can agree with the whole item list overall consistency, it could use an overhaul with better color difference between items in lists, as well as show hide eye icons etc.

jwiede
08-05-2015, 01:12 PM
I havenīt experienced it to be such a Huge issue, but anyway I agree with you with the eye icon...it is an issue for newbies and if you are not custom to how it works..but less so for those using it a lot I guess.

Having it offers value for those who don't remember (not just newbies as demonstrated amply by this thread), while omitting it benefits neither user class.


the Hv panel needs to recognize which Items are active as having applied hypervoxels, as well as checkbox or display to show active and non active for being renderable or non renderable at the same time, and also display all other items that are not having any hypervoxels on them, so I think that is way they have it the way they do now..a better way to do it, well ..please showcase how if anyone knows better ways.

It's still just two binary states for each element: HV active / HV inactive and HV visible / HV invisible. The row's visibility checkbox simply needs to be disabled when the row's activity checkbox is empty to accommodate their relationship, which is trivial.

Still, you're probably correct that it will not be fixed. Complacency kills by inches, not miles. That doesn't make it any less lethal.

prometheus
08-05-2015, 04:42 PM
I agree on the first part, the two state an rows visibility checkbox and activity I donīt understand...I reckon you guys would like to have it like this?

when unchecking the visibility (arrow uncheck) you would also like the item object name to be unbold?
I wouldnīt want it that way, because then thereīs nothing that differentiate it from other items that are non active...or am I wrong here? unless you use the show button and select hypervoxels only..that would only display all active objects.

if you want it to simply deactivate and activate by purely checking the arrow, there would be no way to test or deselect certain items for non visibility when that is needed, and go back to make it visible when needed..without destroying the hv settings.

I have no real issue with the list as it is now, but I recognize it would be better to have an eye icon over the arrow checkboxes to clearly distinguish it from the confusion of it being a deactivation checkbox.
To sum it up for me, It would be enough to add that eye icon or a text that says show, and the actual show button and itīs drop down list could be renamed to filter instead maybe.


You know what..I might not follow what you guys mean, if someone could whip out a graphic mockup how it should be, that would be fine with me...and if doable it might help the lw team as well.

a side note, there are bugs that have been in the hv menus for some time, you can be standing on one hv item and tweak settings, just to find out that nothing happens, and it is actually tweaking some other hv item...That is really serious and screws up a nice good setting sometimes.