PDA

View Full Version : At least we're not Blender



jeric_synergy
04-25-2016, 11:00 AM
Seriously, WTF?

http://blenderartists.org/forum/showthread.php?251642-How-to-select-multiple-objects-using-the-outliner

It's like they WANT to piss people off.

Makes one really appreciate what we got.

erikals
04-25-2016, 12:44 PM
wouldn't it be Awesome if Blender had a Smooooth User Interface !?!  http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/king.gif

hey, one day... http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

jeric_synergy
04-25-2016, 01:47 PM
So far, my Blender "learning experience" path has been strewn with rakes, ala Sideshow Bob:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WZLJpMOxS4

MichaelT
04-25-2016, 02:01 PM
Ton isn't very known to be very open for change. Despite his stubborn mentality, it have allowed for Blender to be created in the form it is now. So give, and take I suppose.

jeric_synergy
04-25-2016, 02:11 PM
Ton isn't very known to be very open for change. Despite his stubborn mentality, it have allowed for Blender to be created in the form it is now. So give, and take I suppose.
I guess he enjoys being a niche of a niche.

SELECTION is such a HUGE DEAL, that swimming upstream against established convention, even if it was established after the baby steps one own software, is just foolish, and it's not like the world isn't alienated enough against Blender's UI.

It's like "Here, it's all umlauts, ALL THE TIME."

allabulle
04-25-2016, 08:09 PM
Again with this? :)

jeric_synergy
04-25-2016, 08:18 PM
:) I can see being weird for a radical idea, like the 3D Cursor, which is interesting. But selection in an Outliner? Pshhh.

Anyway, at least it can stand as a cautionary tale for other developers. I gotta say, Unity is EXTREMELY logical, so kudos to them.

GandB
04-25-2016, 09:10 PM
That thread appears to be two years old now, Jeric. Perhaps something's changed by now?

Dodgy
04-25-2016, 10:11 PM
It still seems to be the same in the last Blender I downloaded...

Rayek
04-25-2016, 11:48 PM
Every 3d application has its strengths and points which can be improved. They all have their pros and cons.

I think comparisons are useful when we look at the positive aspects in other applications, and how those ideas may be a source of potential improvements. Which is constructive thinking.

Just slagging off other software is, to me, a sign of group thinking and/or just plain anxiety/negative emotions. Be happy with the software you use - they're only tools after all. Focus on doing creative stuff, rather than trying to find reasons and justifications why your software is superior compared to others. That is a complete time waster, and merely the inner Gremlin talking. Negative emotions create robots out of us.

Be mindful, and spend your time working on creative stuff, and have fun doing it. My two cents.

jeric_synergy
04-25-2016, 11:56 PM
That thread appears to be two years old now, Jeric. Perhaps something's changed by now?
Nah, because I was consulting that thread to figure out the issue with the current Blender outliner. Same methodology today.

They are convinced of certain methodologies, and if you're STEEPED in those, as the devs are, it's probably the rest of the world that seems crazy.

There's lots of good ideas in Blender, but it doesn't have a certain cohesiveness that I see in well-designed applications.

Rayek
04-26-2016, 12:10 AM
There's lots of good ideas in Blender, but it doesn't have a certain cohesiveness that I see in well-designed applications.

I agree - the GUI is in need of a clean-up. The devs and Ton are aware of this, and things are improving, if a bit slowly. The 2.5 refactor had a number of GUI ideas which never made it in the final version (such as complete customization control of the overall buttons and their locations).

And yes, you have a point there: Lightwave's dualistic Modeler<-->Layout also lacks that certain cohesiveness you mention ;-P

allabulle
04-26-2016, 12:16 AM
This thread will evolve to the point of asking for the next blog post from Rob or Lino. And then to wonder what happened to LightWave communication. :)

Seriously, though, I can understand your frustration (let me call it that way, with no harm intended) jeric_synergy. But Blender wasn't an accident and it's mostly like it is by design. Surely they add things up at a later stage here and there that don't fit quite right, and after a few additions, they re-organize it a bit. But that's not uncommon in other programs either. That could explain their stubbornness (again, no hard feelings here), and also why there are some inconsistencies. I had a difficult time at first too, but the more I use it, the more I like it. And I can see some things that puzzle me, or others I would change. But come on, enjoy it a bit. Or try something else.

By the way, LightWave used to be right-click selection, and an option to select with left-click was added: not a too far distant software with unbelievable design flaws, huh? :) In Blender you can actually change quite a few more hotkeys than in LightWave, it seems, and I still use both gladly.

There's a team about to engage in the cohesiveness of the interface, again, on the works. Or near to, sorry I can't confirm it right now. They are well aware of some of the inconsistencies. Not so much about their poor poor poor design flaws, because those were intended. I happen to like them, for once. You secretly like Blender too. Isn't it? Isn't it? Yes you do. :)

allabulle
04-26-2016, 12:21 AM
Rayek has the mic, now. :)

jeric_synergy
04-26-2016, 12:41 AM
You secretly like Blender too. Isn't it? Isn't it? Yes you do. :)
Hahah. :D

I want to like Blender: it's got some functionality that I crave (I forget what the buzzword is: "live" duplication? ). But they don't make it easy. Now, if I had money to burn, I'd be on C4D so fast the forum would collapse in my wake, but dang, it's literally INFINITELY more expensive than Blender, and multiples of my continuing funds for LW upgrades.

The crazy thing is, LW has a ton of hidden connections that I occasionally run across, often in an old Splinegod tutorial-- there's hidden goodies that are just TOO well hidden to do much good. Only people like RR can unearth them for us mortals. That's what keeps my tutorial budget on fire.

safetyman
04-26-2016, 05:17 AM
TBH I really only use the outliner to hide/lock objects and occasionally parent things. It's not a huge deal for me to select things, even if I have a lot of objects in my scene. I guess it's because of my workflow, but some people have issues with that I don't, and vice versa. In other words, it's not a deal breaker for me.

As for the interface: I'm sick of everyone complaining about Blender's interface. I find it very intuitive and simple to use; you just have to take the time to get used to it... LIKE ANY SOFTWARE. Maybe it's just me, since I've used other programs that are a PITA to navigate ('cough' Zbrush 'cough'). Just because LW or something else is "easy" to use doesn't mean every other 3D program has to copy it. If you can't handle it don't use it, but quit whining about how hard it is to use. It's a tired argument and you can go to a billion other threads to complain about it; please, we don't need another one here. Maybe I'll start a thread on how Modeler and Layout should be integrated.:devil:

lightscape
04-26-2016, 05:29 AM
I'm sick of everyone complaining about Blender's interface.

Then stop reading how everyone complains about blenders interface. If you use it thats good for you. For everyone else it sucks.

djwaterman
04-26-2016, 08:19 AM
Blender is awesome if you can take time out to learn it, I think the UI is pretty good, just some minor things that can befuddle the novice, or if like me you don't use it consistently and return to it after long periods. I still prefer LW.

jeric_synergy
04-26-2016, 08:30 AM
you can go to a billion other threads to complain about it; please, we don't need another one here.
Dood, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. It's right in the title.

1) Talking smack about other s/w in the "Community" forum seems the right place to me. 2) Pointing out that LW devs don't do bizarre stuff like ignore a boatload of user convention isn't even negative. 3) Dumping on ZBrush's weaknesses is fine by me, especially when it's centered around learning from their 'mistakes'-- the hard part is knowing which is mistake and which is genius paradigm breaking. (NOT using "shift-click" to MultiSelect is NOT genius paradigm breaking.)

wyattharris
04-26-2016, 09:42 AM
Maybe it's just me, since I've used other programs that are a PITA to navigate ('cough' Zbrush 'cough').
Nah, ZB is a snap to navigate. Its knowing how to actually use it that seems to scare most new users. ZB has a specific focus though vs. being the everything in a box like LW and Blender. Even so, they still use fairly standard hotkeys that most every other program uses. Blender seems to never want to do that.

tischbein3
04-26-2016, 09:44 AM
I'm actually a big fan of the interface, but I agree: The whole outliner needs some love, its pretty much in the state of 2.49, (for example its still fixed size) and although it was a nice idea to provide access to all data, through datablock-browsing I never encountered anyone who actually use this feature (too complicated ?). I hope that in the 2.8 rewrite it will get some love.
Maybe you might submit a proposal at:
https://rightclickselect.com

jeric_synergy
04-26-2016, 09:52 AM
HA! That is a GENIUS url! :bowdown:

jasonwestmas
04-26-2016, 09:55 AM
golly that blender font is hard to read. Plus black against dark grey doesn't help.

50one
04-26-2016, 09:57 AM
...Wondering how much of those whining would be willing to fork out some cash to sponsor the development...:)

jeric_synergy
04-26-2016, 10:21 AM
...Wondering how much of those whining would be willing to fork out some cash to sponsor the development...:)
The second I make some money with it.

A lot of VR people are grabbing Blender, so I think the next two years might be very healthy for them.

MichaelT
04-26-2016, 10:44 AM
I would be happy to give money to the project.. if they actually listened, and did what people have been asking for ages (like hiding that 'life saving bath ring'. I know what it is, and it is useful... when I need it. Most of the time I don't. And yes, there is a plugin for that.. but c'mon... really?). They do listen, but still do things their own way. But last year Ton actually admitted that they are out of key combinations on the keyboard. So he *had* to think about changing the UI now. Painted into the corner and all that :)

erikals
04-26-2016, 10:55 AM
i'd be willing to pay too, but Blender ain't my cup of Coffee.
i'd be willing to suggest Modeler plugins, and pay for development.

however, i did read LWG will be working on Modeler next  (2017, 2018) -link- (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149194-New-Blog-Post-The-Modifier-Stack&p=1460368&viewfull=1#post1460368)

if so, it'd make more sense to wait requesting Plugins until after LightWave 2017 / LightWave 2018

then again, who knows, things might change.

50one
04-26-2016, 11:02 AM
The second I make some money with it.

Although I like you, that's a weak argument:)

jasonwestmas
04-26-2016, 11:36 AM
...Wondering how much of those whining would be willing to fork out some cash to sponsor the development...:)

no never, they can't even get the color and text right.

safetyman
04-26-2016, 11:49 AM
Then stop reading how everyone complains about blenders interface. If you use it thats good for you. For everyone else it sucks.

Troll comments like this don't really further the discussion. Many more people use Blender than Lightwave worldwide, so "for everyone else" must mean those who open it for 5 minutes, can't figure it out, then close it -- a small minority of folks.

Wickedpup
04-26-2016, 11:54 AM
This thread will evolve to the point of asking for the next blog post from Rob or Lino. And then to wonder what happened to LightWave communication. :)

Nah, it's only a month since the last blog post so it's a bit early to be asking for anything.....;D

safetyman
04-26-2016, 12:03 PM
Dood, you knew the job was dangerous when you took it. It's right in the title.

1) Talking smack about other s/w in the "Community" forum seems the right place to me.

Agreed.


2) Pointing out that LW devs don't do bizarre stuff like ignore a boatload of user convention isn't even negative.

Sooooo... separating the program into 2 separate pieces is normal behavior and doesn't go against "convention"? News to me. And how long have the devs kept it this way, seemingly ignoring the user base? I know they aren't, but it ain't easy to change a program like Lightwave to be more in keeping with "convention" now is it? Keep that in mind when referring to how Blender's interface/UI goes against convention... at least they will eventually address this and it will happen fairly soon.

I could say, "At least Blender doesn't split the program into 2 pieces. Come on, do they want to piss people off?" See my point?

That's really all I wanted to say. I'll go away quietly now.

wyattharris
04-26-2016, 12:11 PM
Troll comments like this don't really further the discussion. Many more people use Blender than Lightwave worldwide, so "for everyone else" must mean those who open it for 5 minutes, can't figure it out, then close it -- a small minority of folks.
I don't believe so. Since these same complaints about Blender have been there from the very beginning and do not get addressed.
Most of the critique I see about the program (and this is over many years) are from people who love it and use it regularly. Their main complaint I see is how Ton does not listen or refuses to change design philosophy. I've seen the program go from scoffed at in public forums to openly discussed and sometimes praised but those key complaints still keep popping up.

Plenty of people still use it though so it can't be that bad. Either that or price is as big a factor as it sounds.

bazsa73
04-26-2016, 12:31 PM
I love Blender. It offers lots of functionality for no free. Who cares about the interface, why is LW perfect? Or Max's early 90's GIF gallery km long tiny button crazyness straight from DOS?
C'mon.

jwiede
04-26-2016, 01:19 PM
i'd be willing to pay too, but Blender ain't my cup of Coffee.
i'd be willing to suggest Modeler plugins, and pay for development.

however, i did read LWG will be working on Modeler next  (2017, 2018) -link- (http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149194-New-Blog-Post-The-Modifier-Stack&p=1460368&viewfull=1#post1460368)

Actually, having just re-read that entire thread from link onwards, I see no explicit statement from LW3DG as to either Modeler work or Layout modeling tools appearing in (if LW Next = LW 2016) LW 2017 or 2018. There was a mention that if they'd gone utterly dark and did nothing else, we could have had it by 2017, but they also explicit stated that's NOT the approach they actually took. As far as I can find, there has been no explicit statement from LW3DG as to when modeling in Layout would be released, other than "beyond LW Next / LW 2016".

If you know of an explicit LW3DG statement it'll arrive in 2017 or 2018, please provide a link to the actual post saying so. The prior link you provided doesn't explicitly mention "modeling in 2017/2018" in context of the approach currently taken by LW3DG.

jwiede
04-26-2016, 01:25 PM
Sooooo... separating the program into 2 separate pieces is normal behavior and doesn't go against "convention"? News to me.

At the time LW's architecture was established, most other 3D packages had "modeling" and "animation/rendering" in separate apps as well (EIAS, Alias pkgs, and so forth). LW's architecture was "normal" for the time, and certainly wasn't a violation of any "standard conventions" of the time.

In contrast, both Microsoft Windows and Apple MacOS OSX have established Human Interface Guidelines for common UI needs and constructs based on extensive CHI research and studies, and the vast majority of apps for those platforms conform to their respective standards (incl. many cross-platform-available apps). Blender devs explicitly choose to have Blender's basic GUI gadgets and entities explicitly deviate very substantially in UX from platform-appropriate Human Interface Guidelines, and according to the responsible designers does so because "they think their way works better" (but for which they provide absolutely no CHI research or data to support that position). The platform Human Interface Guidelines included extensive references to supporting CHI research data analyzed by Apple and Microsoft.

hrgiger
04-26-2016, 01:40 PM
Actually, having just re-read that entire thread from link onwards, I see no explicit statement from LW3DG as to either Modeler work or Layout modeling tools appearing in (if LW Next = LW 2016) LW 2017 or 2018. There was a mention that if they'd gone utterly dark and did nothing else, we could have had it by 2017, but they also explicit stated that's NOT the approach they actually took. As far as I can find, there has been no explicit statement from LW3DG as to when modeling in Layout would be released, other than "beyond LW Next / LW 2016".

If you know of an explicit LW3DG statement it'll arrive in 2017 or 2018, please provide a link to the actual post saying so. The prior link you provided doesn't explicitly mention "modeling in 2017/2018" in context of the approach currently taken by LW3DG.

John, I think he's probably referring to Jarno where he made the following comments:

"So Layout had the greater need with the lesser amount of work needed, and we tackled it first. Then with the experience gained, lots of new code in place, and the release clock reset, we can look at the modelling tools including the possibility of making them work in Layout.

Unless you all promise to give us money now and wait until 2017, the work had to be split up with release milestones."

There he specifically mentions 2017, however, I really go the sense that he was speaking in generalities. After all, Jarno also admitted that he knows next to nothing about Modeler as he is pretty much a layout developer so I wouldn't read too much into his comments. Also, we're well on our way into midway through 2016 without a release in sight yet so we don't even know the plausibility of seeing a release again already again in 2017 especially after Rob told us that they're not committed to doing annual releases, that they will release when they feel the software is ready.

jeric_synergy
04-26-2016, 04:09 PM
Reading the following was like listening to a beautiful sonata for me:

At the time LW's architecture was established, most other 3D packages had "modeling" and "animation/rendering" in separate apps as well (EIAS, Alias pkgs, and so forth). LW's architecture was "normal" for the time, and certainly wasn't a violation of any "standard conventions" of the time.

In contrast, both Microsoft Windows and Apple MacOS OSX have established Human Interface Guidelines for common UI needs and constructs based on extensive CHI research and studies, and the vast majority of apps for those platforms conform to their respective standards (incl. many cross-platform-available apps). Blender devs explicitly choose to have Blender's basic GUI gadgets and entities explicitly deviate very substantially in UX from platform-appropriate Human Interface Guidelines, and according to the responsible designers does so because "they think their way works better" (but for which they provide absolutely no CHI research or data to support that position). The platform Human Interface Guidelines included extensive references to supporting CHI research data analyzed by Apple and Microsoft.
Music! Anyway, to address safetyman's point: the division is of course historical, it's not as if LW were unified and they separated it-- it was ALWAYS separated. In fact, it was begun as two separate products. My first "LW" objects (actually, Videoscape) were done with a pencil and graph paper. And, in fact, I >do< think the unification has been delayed too long, but that's apparently not a management priority.

To stay within the TINY remit of my original post: AFAICS, Blender COULD implement "normal" selection procedures for the outliner and RETAIN their idiosyncratic methods without collision (although I'm no Blender expert). It's certainly a big "rake in the face" for the beginning user who might expect that 'selecting things from a list', a process that computer users must do multiple times a day, be by conventional methods. As it is, they just seem to be bloody minded about many problematic aspects of their UI. --You shoulda heard the caterwauling when I suggested to f*ck*ng Media 100 users that maybe, JUST maybe it wasn't really necessary to hold down the CMD key when using hotkeys because, after all, we were editing video and not WRITING A G*DD*MN LETTER. The idea of holding down ONE key versus the SAME key plus CMD was just too much for them. It could even be both ways, simultaneously. But NOOOOooooooo. ---People resist improving UIs when they should not.

(UI research indicates that the fewer keys the user needs to use, the better.)

Rayek
04-26-2016, 05:57 PM
Here are the things which I like about Blender's GUI, which I feel Lightwave could learn one or two things from:

- unified interface (duh!). Option to quickly focus on one object with numpad /

- the non-overlapping panels. I would really like to get rid of all those floating panels in Layout and Modeler. It would be great to have the graph editor docked at the bottom. In Blender windows can be docked or kept floating. I like that - although to keep a window floating on top a third-party utility is required for Blender.

- the themes and their configurability in Blender. Lightwave pales in comparison, and any change made to GUI colours in Lightwave means a reboot (addendum: for layout, at least). In Blender just about ANYTHING can be changed colour-wise, and any change affects the layout in real-time.

- fully retina screen compatible. A simple preference setting takes care of this, and doubles the lines on the viewport and all the widgets. Nice.

- the awesome option to seamlessly scale the GUI using a simple PPI slider. Really, this rocks stones. The best we can do in Layout is an exe switch -f"Segoe UI [email protected]". Modeler? Out of luck. Really? In this day and age?

- the option to scale the content of most panels with shift-middle mouse buttton.

- I can assign a gradient to the background of the viewport. :-P

- the option to change vertex display size.

- the input/key bindings customization allows for deep changes which include mouse buttons and actions.

- pie menus

- matcaps while modeling & sculpting

- full screen mode (without the distracting OS chrome)

- as many instances of any window as you require. For example, I can open multiple graph editors, which is handy.

- A small thing, but still: Blender works with the mouse and my Wacom tablet without the need for a specific setting to be changed.

- a small thing again: switching between maximized view and smaller views does not flicker in Blender.

- grease pencil for notes and other things. This becomes useful once Lightwave's unification is finished (if?). Blender's grease pencil is now becoming a way to 2d animate directly in it.

- option to change default opengl lighting for solid mode

- zoom in and out with the scroll wheel (no alt required like in Layout, and it does not work in Modeler).

- orbit/pan the view (depending on the view mode) with the middle mouse button. Combined with the scroll wheel this makes for fast viewport navigation, and no need to hold down a modifier key.

- pan the graph editor, node editor, and other panels with the middle mouse button. We can zoom in and out with the scroll wheel in Layout, but not pan the view without holding down a modifier key.

- navigate long content panels with the middle mouse button.

- the node editor in Blender is far more user-friendly. No limit to zooming in. Nodes automatically move out of the way to make way for inserted nodes. Many other little workflow and GUI tidbits make working with nodes much more enjoyable.

- easy workspace and scene switcher (dropdown)

- easier addon (plugin) management.

- multiple input fields can be edited simultaneously by dragging over a input field group.

- GUI setup (not the colours) is saved in the file - with an option to load it later or not when working in a different location.

- instant switch to various languages, including Asian ones. No restart required.


In Lightwave I do like:

- the menus can be easily customized. I miss that in Blender.

- the button configuration can be easily customized. Possible in Blender though Python, but not exactly user-friendly.

- yes, the default left mouse button to select things.

- the on-screen widgets for object creation. Although tools such as HardOps (hard surface modeling addon for Blender) do allow for these.

- the tools are grouped better in general.

- floated windows stay on top by default.

- easy multiple view switcher

bazsa73
04-27-2016, 12:23 AM
Let's not wait for new releases then!

erikals
04-27-2016, 01:32 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWacQrEcMHk


and answers, http://blender.stackexchange.com/questions/28156/what-happened-to-the-blender-ui



also see >
The Blender Foundation responds to UI criticisms
http://www.cgchannel.com/2013/10/the-blender-foundation-responds-to-ui-criticisms

jeric_synergy
04-27-2016, 01:33 AM
Here are the things which I like about Blender's GUI, which I feel Lightwave could learn one or two things from:
Informed and informative! :thumbsup:

You left out (I think): 'soft' view transitions. I think those really help the user stay oriented in 3D space, versus the instantaneous change in view LW affords.

safetyman
04-27-2016, 05:52 AM
At the time LW's architecture was established, most other 3D packages had "modeling" and "animation/rendering" in separate apps as well (EIAS, Alias pkgs, and so forth). LW's architecture was "normal" for the time, and certainly wasn't a violation of any "standard conventions" of the time.

In contrast, both Microsoft Windows and Apple MacOS OSX have established Human Interface Guidelines for common UI needs and constructs based on extensive CHI research and studies, and the vast majority of apps for those platforms conform to their respective standards (incl. many cross-platform-available apps). Blender devs explicitly choose to have Blender's basic GUI gadgets and entities explicitly deviate very substantially in UX from platform-appropriate Human Interface Guidelines, and according to the responsible designers does so because "they think their way works better" (but for which they provide absolutely no CHI research or data to support that position). The platform Human Interface Guidelines included extensive references to supporting CHI research data analyzed by Apple and Microsoft.

I understand what you're saying, and you may be correct, but aside from right button select, what specific things does Blender do that goes out of bounds with regards to Human Interface Guidelines? I fail to see how people get so confused over a couple of little minor "non-conforming" interface quirks. Jeez, it's not rocket surgery.

I know it doesn't appeal to everyone, and that's fine, but it's almost like there are a bunch of haters or anti-Blender evangelists running around trying to trash it for no other reason than it's different. I think the real reason these discussions come up is because Blender is actually threatening to overtake more "conventional" tools for the average user (it probably will never gain much ground with big studios, which is understandable). If Blender was really a piece of trash, we wouldn't be having these discussions.

The only reason I don't drop LW and use Blender full-time is because I feel loyal to LW and this community -- which is a great one -- and it's hard to dump an old friend that's been so good to me over the years, and it's still a good tool despite all its faults. Truthfully, I could get by with using Blender for everything I do without opening LW at all, but I still use it for certain things. Good times.

MichaelT
04-27-2016, 09:00 AM
I actually prefer the simplistic UI in LW, but it is my own personal opinion of course. I even don't (personally) mind the separation that much. Even though I would like integration. But if I had to choose one thing only, that I consider essential to be included in modeler. It would be having VPR that actually shows what will be finally rendered. So I can work with modelling, and materials.. and see how it will look in the end.

jeric_synergy
04-27-2016, 09:30 AM
I think that's basically impossible, because then it's got to do ALL the things the renderer does. So, it will be just exactly as slow as the renderer. --But I'd sure like to have VPR in Modeler.

One thing that having the separation does, is prevent us from doing animated >modeling< -type animations. There's workarounds, but you have to really exert yourself to do them. I imagine, on the other side of the fence, that the grass is greener -- the other apps may do that but I'm pretty sure the users complain about their apps too.

tischbein3
04-27-2016, 09:48 AM
and answers,

A lot of his first video (changing the default settings) wasn't that bad. but his big ui proposal has flaws itself,
for example:

Going back to a horizontal layout: this was tested in pre 2.5 (button windows horizontal) , they actually dismissed it, since
you can cram the information in a much more eye pleasing way (list view). Also on a 16:9 monitor horizontal
space is valued space. Also you get practically a square 3d viewport on the default layout settings, wich is very
good for modeling.

Icon only based toolbar - discussed on this forum to great extend. text rocks

Tool settings to the right
I would actually hate it, currently the eye and mouse movement goes like this: Top Left for selecting the tool, and down for adjusting the values, wich imho is far shorter than selecting a tool on the left and adjusting its values on the right panel... in fact currently I can close one panel without loosing access to the tools..also take a look on how cluttered the right menu currently is, not the ideal place to nest such an important and often used feature inside it.

thats some of the issues I had when he released the video.

he also had a few things to say after his proposal on the blender conference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aIA2LaB2Iw

prometheus
04-27-2016, 10:12 AM
I know it doesn't appeal to everyone, and that's fine, but it's almost like there are a bunch of haters or anti-Blender evangelists running around trying to trash it for no other reason than it's different. I think the real reason these discussions come up is because Blender is actually threatening to overtake more "conventional" tools for the average user (it probably will never gain much ground with big studios, which is understandable). If Blender was really a piece of trash, we wouldn't be having these discussions.




For me I donīt care about any thoughts about "threatening to overtake more conventional tools", that would in my opinion just be a speculative thought around that matter, and not what it is about actually ..I would say I have a problem... and it is quite simple, I donīt like the UI for some reason and it really makes me go...grr, that said, if those element wasnīt there ..I would gladly use it, and I would even consider dumping lightwave if I had been learning blender enough..so it has at least not for me Nothing to do with any speculative threatening agenda..itīs just the UI, and I would state that there is no smoke without a fire, and there have been a lot of people whining over the UI in blender...is that specificly lightwave users becuase they are so used to lightwave? or is it a threat even other major 3d users percieve it to be?...I donīt believe that is the case though.


Blender is definitly not trash, it is free and can outperform lightwave in many areas with features not available in ligthwave and all for most parts for free, that is why people may want to try it out...only to find themself, oh that UI.

Itīs probably not like that for all people I guess, some may have patience for it and are able to work around it, itīs a lot of unecessary thresholds though..and itīs mainly about how I want to work with it or not..so I can like it or not, I am not making any big fuzz or complaints on it except for some ..blah blah whining of the interface here on these forums..(IHavenīt even registred on the blender forums.)
I do not have to pay for blender, I just use it for additional fun and experiments..thus I can not complain to much I guess, itīs just that it is a pitty it does not have a bit better UI.

Itīs no big deal..It doesnīt affect the sales, nor my money purse,It just annoys me a bit ..and that is a little bit of shame that it hasnīt got any better UI, since otherwise it seems so capable.

Newtek...You may ask yourself, do you feel lucky blender doesnīt have an amazing UI..,.well do ya punk? :)

jasonwestmas
04-27-2016, 01:49 PM
I think the freeware and shareware stuff is annoying (not hated) to a lot of folks because it is much more than just a moving target. Freebee-ware is several moving targets moving in different directions and tends to lack a lot of focus.

Depsite the poor first impressions, the software feels wishy washy without a desire to guarantee anything. This is mainly because there is no professing or commercial guidance for which type of market or section of the pipeline that programs like Blender are trying to acquire and support the most. Is this program for the generalist or the specialized big studio? What exactly are its strengths. Please don't present a program as something that is meant to do everything. Nobody in the know is going to fall for that. Knowledgeable 3D creatives are investors who need to know why they should use a piece of software for certain types of jobs in a certain part of the CG animated pipeline.

Ambiguity makes blender and other program development look like an experimental playground with no dependability. For all we know certain things will just stop working in between updates and if that happens there is no financial pressure on the devs to fix those issues.

BTW I don't think this only applies to freeware only, just more heavily. But a lot of commercial products also suffer from these problems I stated. Everyone is trying to be Maya. . . please stop, Invent something new!

Rayek
04-27-2016, 05:00 PM
Hmm... Similar arguments have been made before about "commercial" and "open source" applications, and have been smashed to smithereens as many times.

Blender has a completely open development road map, and its development is centralized through the Blender Institute. Compare that to Cinema4d, for example: in the past few years users have lamented Maxon's utter deafening silence as to its communications towards their customers. And the development is fragmented, and introduced new features almost no user was waiting for, or asked for. Several modules have lagged and their development seemed to have stopped completely for years and years (bodypaint, dynamics, particles, hair, cloth, even Mograph!, etc.)

Newtek is quite silent as well. The refactoring of Lightwave (Core) went terribly wrong. In comparison, the Blender foundation pulled a complete refactoring off, though, with success.

TrueSpace and SoftImage: both commercial 3d applications, both popular, and both dead. Many Adobe applications: same thing. Users up in arms, to no avail. Groups even started initiatives to open source those applications, in order to rescue their beloved software from the grave: too bad, commercial software developers tend to be quite rigid in that regard.

Sorry, a software product being commercial or not has not bearing whatsoever on its long-term viability, or how it is developed. Blender was originally a commercial product as well, and was purchased with the help of the community.

The last 15 years have taught me one thing: investing in commercial software is a risk. If the vendor goes down, so does the software. With Blender and larger open source projects this just has not happened yet. If there is interest in keeping it alive, and users are invested in the application, the product is maintained and developed. In the worst case scenario anyone can still pick up the source code, and continue developing it.

Point in case: a month ago TOonz was open sourced. The first version was quite broken, barely usable on a Mac, missing features compared to its commercial Harlequin sibling. Today version 1.0.2 was released, and pretty much restored all missing features, squashed many bugs, and is now usable on Macs.

No-one could have predicted such an outcome only a couple of weeks ago.

I have seen more commercial products wink out of existence than I can count. In my experience those are just as much a moving target as free or open source apps. Worse, dealing with large software companies is generally pretty headache inducing.

If anything, my experience tells me that commercial software development is far more ambiguous than open source development.

erikals
04-27-2016, 06:35 PM
true, i guess people are just more worried that it might happen.

i do want to use Blender, i just can't find a Pro feature i would use it for.

Dynamics - no, LightWave does that fine, and i can use my $200 Syflex.
Smoke Fluids - no, i'll use Turbulence or Houdini Indie.
Water Fluids - no, not close to good enough imo, i'll use Houdini Indie.
Modeling - nah, i like the LightWave approach, even with it's lacks.
CA - maybe.
Sculpting - nope, i have 3DCoat. that said, great med-res feature.
Paint - again, 3DCoat.
Motion Graphics - maybe.
Render - looks to have a very nice render engine.
(a LightWave export> Blender Render pipeline is out of the question though, too much fuzz for me.)

to me the "why not" use Blender, quickly turns into "why"

i'm sure i will add it to my app list though, eventually...

Blender looks quite nice,... it's just not for me. (yet)


... i might take a second look to see how Blender deals with Motion Graphics ...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Going back to a horizontal layout: this was tested in pre 2.5 (button windows horizontal) , they actually dismissed it, since
you can cram the information in a much more eye pleasing way (list view). Also on a 16:9 monitor horizontal
space is valued space.
yes, it seemed to be a little too much.


Icon only based toolbar - discussed on this forum to great extend. text rocks
sort of, on a horizontal top bar it's quite useful, partly shown here >
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIGFoshc9Zw


he also had a few things to say after his proposal on the blender conference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aIA2LaB2Iw
yes, forgot about that one, good find.


Tool settings to the right
agree, a common mistake.

Rayek
04-27-2016, 06:58 PM
As always, in the end it comes down to personal preferences, workflows, client requirements, and so on.

Work with what you like, have fun, and be happy! And let's be grateful for the fact that 3d is so incredibly affordable nowadays, and accessible to anyone (even including crap hardware!).

lightscape
04-27-2016, 07:44 PM
As always, in the end it comes down to personal preferences, workflows, client requirements, and so on.


Exactly. This is why so many post about their dislike about blender ui and workflow. There is something people don't like about it so blender users just suck it up and accept it.

Blender is like those infamous foods, stinky tofu, vegemite, natto, durian. Some people like them, but also many people really can't take them. :D


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxf5hmDhPLE

And then wait for the aftertaste....

Rayek
04-27-2016, 07:49 PM
Sure, sure... You are entitled to your beliefs and personal opinions.

Reality tends to be much more grey and complicated, though.

jasonwestmas
04-27-2016, 08:27 PM
Hmm... Similar arguments have been made before about "commercial" and "open source" applications, and have been smashed to smithereens as many times.
If anything, my experience tells me that commercial software development is far more ambiguous than open source development.

I think the ambiguity for software direction and focus was more prevalent 10-12 years ago when everyone looked at max, maya, softimage, lightwave, cinema as competing products as if they were the same software but just felt differently like different baseball mitt brands or shoes. I didn't see them that way even back then. I saw very unique software and still do.

A few developers today are looking at their software and taking its strengths to an even stronger position. Other developers are putting their eggs all in one basket and even trying to attract new generalist markets (autodesk) because of the sheer popularity of it in the film and game biz. . .and then killing other projects that are less popular. So no, I don't think softimage/xsi has been all that popular when compared to the Alias-wavefront and discreet software. Even though it was cool, it missed the boat at some point.

Kind of like what Erikals is saying: Interest in Blender is lacking because it doesn't shine in any one particular area. I think it puts on an average presentation at best. Lightwave is slightly better at this these days.

I mean maybe there is some corner of the world that is using blender in large studios but everyone I've ever met is a max, maya or Zbrush. One guy I work with happened to go to Dave School and learned some lightwave there. But that was over a decade ago.

jeric_synergy
04-28-2016, 12:07 AM
My major interest in software comparisons, and trash talk, is: WHAT GOOD IDEAS DO THEY HAVE THAT WE CAN STEAL? Rayek did a bang-up job there (above, #39). :thumbsup:

Lesser, because more difficult, is : WHAT CAUTIONARY TALES CAN WE TAKE AWAY FROM THEIR LATEST MISADVENTURES?

EG, although not in our specific field, Apple's periodic descents into insanity (Final Cut X, anybody?).

One thing I think LWG is neglecting is the power of incremental improvements on users' morale & public relations: I'm pretty sure they could address at least some of the low-hanging fruit with very simple patches AND/OR SCRIPTS. Heck, some of them could be addressed with WARNINGS (i.e. "don't try to save a cache file >2gigabytes").

safetyman
04-28-2016, 05:34 AM
..itīs just the UI, and I would state that there is no smoke without a fire, and there have been a lot of people whining over the UI in blender...is that specificly lightwave users becuase they are so used to lightwave? or is it a threat even other major 3d users percieve it to be?...I donīt believe that is the case though.


Blender is definitly not trash, it is free and can outperform lightwave in many areas with features not available in ligthwave and all for most parts for free, that is why people may want to try it out...only to find themself, oh that UI.

Itīs probably not like that for all people I guess, some may have patience for it and are able to work around it, itīs a lot of unecessary thresholds though..and itīs mainly about how I want to work with it or not..so I can like it or not, I am not making any big fuzz or complaints on it except for some ..blah blah whining of the interface here on these forums..(IHavenīt even registred on the blender forums.)
I do not have to pay for blender, I just use it for additional fun and experiments..thus I can not complain to much I guess, itīs just that it is a pitty it does not have a bit better UI.

Itīs no big deal..It doesnīt affect the sales, nor my money purse,It just annoys me a bit ..and that is a little bit of shame that it hasnīt got any better UI, since otherwise it seems so capable.

I understand some people don't get the UI, and you keep mentioning this, but you never give specific examples of what you find so difficult or off-putting. It's not that different from learning any other program... did you latch on to Lightwave right away or did you have to go through tutorials or some other type of training to figure out how to use it? Don't lie (not saying you would -- when I say "you" I'm talking about the LW community at large).


This is why so many post about their dislike about blender ui and workflow. There is something people don't like about it so blender users just suck it up and accept it.

You're totally wrong. Visit some Blender forums occasionally -- very helpful and there are very few posts about the folks disliking the UI. Oh, and there are hundreds more posts than there are here.


Blender is like those infamous foods, stinky tofu, vegemite, natto, durian. Some people like them, but also many people really can't take them. :D....

Your opinion, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. It's more like peanuts -- the more I eat, the more I want.

prometheus
04-28-2016, 07:47 AM
I understand some people don't get the UI, and you keep mentioning this, but you never give specific examples of what you find so difficult or off-putting. It's not that different from learning any other program... did you latch on to Lightwave right away or did you have to go through tutorials or some other type of training to figure out how to use it? Don't lie (not saying you would -- when I say "you" I'm talking about the LW community at large).


t.

Where do you get that to assert that? I may not have said it in this thread, but if you search through all threads here in the forum Ever posted, you will find me having done so...so I just donīt understand how you can come to such conclusion that I never have given specific samples, that suggest you wouldnīt ever have missed any of my post donī it. ...Im not gonna browse through everything and find it for you, but I can mentione here again that I mentioned the 3d cursor...

https://www.google.se/?gws_rd=ssl#q=how+can+I+get+rid+of+the+blender+3d+ cursor

I have also mentioned the lousy way of switching from quad to single ports, you will have to set it up first.

I have also mentioned the too much variations between rounded square buttons.
I have also posted the samples of the icon toolbar which makes no sense ..for me with a showcase of text buttons.
I have also chimed in with controlling brushes on the left toolbar..but you would have to go to the right toolbar for editing texture and those values that is connected to the brush..
I got more than that..but itīs enough for now.
I also chime in on the outline selection parts...itīs not nice.
dragging and closing of the windows is not something I like much of how it is working.


There are however other parts of the UI I indeed like, but it doesnīt weigh up what it in fact lacks.
I am not out to trash blender for the sake of it or some secret agenda, I like a lot of it with the sculpting, painting weight map and particle emission, skin modifiers etc, cycles depth of field etc...so If it had a nicer UI, it would allow me to spend more time without that annoyance..and thus getting more proficient with it, some folks do ..good gor them, but for me itīs not working smoothly.

You were in this thread too safetyman, but wasnīt that specific?
http://forums.newtek.com/showthread.php?149183-Blender-Hard-Ops-Great-Modeling-Addon/page4&highlight=blender+viewports

So you can disagree with me on things like quad viewports or not, for me I do not want to be without them , and you donīt need them it seems, but donīt state I havenīt been specific, a workflow should take care to work for more than a single person, so for instance if you like to use the 3d cursor..which in fact the thread starter does it seems, there are those who thinks it is of distraction, so a function of disabling it may be good, and activate if and when you want to use it..since it has values for some things anyway.

and with reference to how was lightwave for me in the beginning?.....I would say, much easier and way more natural for me, and I wouldnīt using it now I think... if it had that kind of UI to overcome in the first place.
In fact I have been starting up blender now and then in the past, just to give up on it mostly...not until recently when I thought the sculpting tools and the skin modifier could serve me well..then I had to spend extra time to overcome itīs UI...so yes it is doable no question about that..but it is annoyance in a way lightwave never was.

Edited...must add, there are ofcourse UI annoyance with lightwave as well with the xpanels, not able to scale them as you want, nor docking or expanding menus, and the fact you canīt "design" the UI directly in full manner as you can with blender, but that doesnīt affect me when actually working with lightwave as much as the UI does with blender.

Rayek
04-28-2016, 09:17 AM
By the way, this is starting to look really nice - rather interesting to see a 3d package evolve features from 3d into 2d ones:


https://vimeo.com/164067136



And Hardops (I got it, it speeds up hard surface modeling):
http://imgur.com/3MhyrA6?r
https://www.youtube.com/user/masterxeon1001/videos

Rayek
04-28-2016, 09:19 AM
https://vimeo.com/164288871

Wickedpup
04-28-2016, 10:05 AM
Your opinion, which I wholeheartedly disagree with. It's more like peanuts -- the more I eat, the more I want.
Some people are allergic to peanuts....so your analogy is actually quite similar to lightscape`s....which you disagree with...... :ohmy:

Rayek
04-28-2016, 10:19 AM
and with reference to how was lightwave for me in the beginning?.....I would say, much easier and way more natural for me, and I wouldnīt using it now I think... if it had that kind of UI to overcome in the first place.
In fact I have been starting up blender now and then in the past, just to give up on it mostly...not until recently when I thought the sculpting tools and the skin modifier could serve me well..then I had to spend extra time to overcome itīs UI...so yes it is doable no question about that..but it is annoyance in a way lightwave never was.

Edited...must add, there are of course UI annoyance with lightwave as well with the xpanels, not able to scale them as you want, nor docking or expanding menus, and the fact you canīt "design" the UI directly in full manner as you can with blender, but that doesnīt affect me when actually working with lightwave as much as the UI does with blender.

I started out on the Amiga with Sculpt/Animate, some Truespace, then switched to C4d on the Amiga, then to 3dsMax on the PC, and back to C4d. C4d's upkeep became too much to bear and I cross-graded tp Lightwave 7. Then at some point I started to look into Blender 2.46 (the old version!).

Of all the 3d applications I worked with throughout the years, Lightwave gave me the most headaches while getting to grips with it. Cinema4d was the easiest to learn. Blender came naturally to me - I learned it WAY faster than Lighwave (probably because of my Max background).

I really had to get used to the neurotic Modeler<-->Layout separation of doing things - that was new to me, and I dislike it with a vengeance up till this day. For some reason Lightwave and I never got along that well. It took me weeks to feel somewhat comfortable working in it - and for the first time in my life I actually bought books (Albee) to teach it myself.

As I stated before in this thread, the floated windows concept in Layout is frustrating - I really wish we could dock those. I feel Lightwave's GUI is quite old-fashioned in general. Not being able to scale the GUI at all drives me crazy, and you are correct in saying that LW's GUI is very rigid.

To me Cinema4d and Blender are incredibly flexible in regards to GUI setup - especially working in a three screen setup. Lightwave's GUI is just not that flexible, and it often gets in my way.

Of course this is all purely personal subjective experience. I use my license of Lightwave for rendering things once in a while - rendering is good in Lightwave. Each time I return to Lightwave, it feels like I am swimming against the flow. Can't help it.

But again, it is subjective. Although I do think Lightwave is in need for a GUI revamp. And, of course, unification - if/when Newtek finally gets that done, I will probably regain interest. And what is taking them so long? Blender's first refactoring was finished ages ago, and the Blender Foundation has been working on planning a second revamp to address the GUI issues (and yes, there are indeed issues - bigger and smaller ones).

Does anyone know how far along Newtek is in revamping the GUI into one unified whole?

jeric_synergy
04-28-2016, 10:21 AM
#lwbooster Here's a point in LW's favor: I believe, without any research, that it's easier to jump into LWM and just GO. In contrast the several Blender tutes I've been working on lately all seem to have a bunch of setup up front, of a fairly technical nature. Including opening up what seems to me to be obscure-ish (of course I'm a noob) dialogs and turning on features that were installed automatically (i.e. I didn't add plugins, they came with). Compared to LWM, it all seems very fiddly. YMMV.

FWIW, showing a total LW noob EXTEND and SUBPATCH GLOBAL TOGGLE and you can walk away for a while (ex-LW teacher speaking).

Rayek
04-28-2016, 10:32 AM
I agree - I have taught Blender in the past to students, and other 3d applications. Most students have difficulty just jumping in.

On the other hand, once the basics are setup, they start to fly. But the initial right-mouse click gets them every single time.

Asticles
04-28-2016, 10:53 AM
Hi all,

First sorry for my bad english.

Just bought the Lw software :) and saw this thread. I've made a big post and lost everything because the page expired u_u'

Anyway, I've been using Blender since 2.49 version and I think LW developers can learn a lot about ergonomy with blender.

Rayek, It's worse to click with left mouse button and move objects without knowing it. Also is worse to click with the wheel to select.

Regards!

wyattharris
04-28-2016, 11:36 AM
This is why so many post about their dislike about blender ui and workflow. There is something people don't like about it so blender users just suck it up and accept it.

You're totally wrong. Visit some Blender forums occasionally -- very helpful and there are very few posts about the folks disliking the UI. Oh, and there are hundreds more posts than there are here.
If everyone knows about the problem and its been beaten to death people aren't going to continue talking about it until something or someone new comes along to stir it up again. Like Jeric. ;)

But you are still ignoring a huge fact that a very large number of Blender users don't like the UI. I know I know, totally subjective on my part you will say but hear me out. I've got a friend I talk to frequently. He's a director and lives in Malaysia. For him the costs are very important so Blender fits well. He works on fairly large productions and really really likes Blender which is cool... and even he still complains about the bizarre philosophy behind the UI design. Its not a matter of learning curve, its just very contrary.

And he is far from the only one. Seems like that is always the addendum. "Oh cool, look at the new film from Blender Foundation." "Boy, Blender sure is coming along... now if only they'd fix the UI." You and Rayek seem to be the odd opinions. And yes, I've used Blender. Cool program and it is really great how much it has opened up 3D to so many people.

prometheus
04-28-2016, 11:42 AM
I started out on the Amiga with Sculpt/Animate, some Truespace, then switched to C4d on the Amiga, then to 3dsMax on the PC, and back to C4d. C4d's upkeep became too much to bear and I cross-graded tp Lightwave 7. Then at some point I started to look into Blender 2.46 (the old version!).

Of all the 3d applications I worked with throughout the years, Lightwave gave me the most headaches while getting to grips with it. Cinema4d was the easiest to learn. Blender came naturally to me - I learned it WAY faster than Lighwave (probably because of my Max background).

I really had to get used to the neurotic Modeler<-->Layout separation of doing things - that was new to me, and I dislike it with a vengeance up till this day. For some reason Lightwave and I never got along that well. It took me weeks to feel somewhat comfortable working in it - and for the first time in my life I actually bought books (Albee) to teach it myself.

As I stated before in this thread, the floated windows concept in Layout is frustrating - I really wish we could dock those. I feel Lightwave's GUI is quite old-fashioned in general. Not being able to scale the GUI at all drives me crazy, and you are correct in saying that LW's GUI is very rigid.

To me Cinema4d and Blender are incredibly flexible in regards to GUI setup - especially working in a three screen setup. Lightwave's GUI is just not that flexible, and it often gets in my way.

Of course this is all purely personal subjective experience. I use my license of Lightwave for rendering things once in a while - rendering is good in Lightwave. Each time I return to Lightwave, it feels like I am swimming against the flow. Can't help it.

But again, it is subjective. Although I do think Lightwave is in need for a GUI revamp. And, of course, unification - if/when Newtek finally gets that done, I will probably regain interest. And what is taking them so long? Blender's first refactoring was finished ages ago, and the Blender Foundation has been working on planning a second revamp to address the GUI issues (and yes, there are indeed issues - bigger and smaller ones).

Does anyone know how far along Newtek is in revamping the GUI into one unified whole?


Indeed the blender GUI is more flexible and designable, and lightwave not, though I would arque that lightwave at least for me is as it should be mostly in terms of viewport management mostly, on the other hand setting UI colors or scale windows is really lousy in lightwave.

I think it may be agreeable for most users here to chime in that it depends on which environment you come from..what you have used before etc, Even if there was a general human perception rule on how humans interact and percieve GUI elements generallly speaking and thus one software may indeed do present something the best way according to that, that doesnīt necessarely mean it would work for all people, the course of having used another softwares philosophy of UI may have imprinted that way of workflow ..so the General approach may not work in such cases.

So indeed it is highly individual, and I donīt think we could come to a proper conclusion unless we had statistic data of people using different software and where we could track how many users was annoyed with a certain softwares UI vs another software.

For you as you stated...blender the most natural, for me..completley the opposite Lightwave for me, and for a lot of others I suspect, and I would say that none than yourself can make any other statement of your own perception, so in the end it ultimatly will just be a bounce back and forth discussion on it worked better for me etc.

yes. true space was the first I tried, then 3d max, have tested cinema4d, maya, houdini, vue, terragen, rhino, zbrush. etc...but lightwave has from scratch provided me with the most natural workflow..and blender the least, at least when getting acess to things or navigate, but all that can also be broken in to smaller areas where lightwave isnīt working as nicely, and blender works better etc...but overall for the main important things, I feel lightwave provides the better one for me.

prometheus
04-28-2016, 11:49 AM
If everyone knows about the problem and its been beaten to death people aren't going to continue talking about it until something or someone new comes along to stir it up again. Like Jeric. ;)

But you are still ignoring a huge fact that a very large number of Blender users don't like the UI. I know I know, totally subjective on my part you will say but hear me out. I've got a friend I talk to frequently. He's a director and lives in Malaysia. For him the costs are very important so Blender fits well. He works on fairly large productions and really really likes Blender which is cool... and even he still complains about the bizarre philosophy behind the UI design. Its not a matter of learning curve, its just very contrary.

And he is far from the only one. Seems like that is always the addendum. "Oh cool, look at the new film from Blender Foundation." "Boy, Blender sure is coming along... now if only they'd fix the UI." You and Rayek seem to be the odd opinions. And yes, I've used Blender. Cool program and it is really great how much it has opened up 3D to so many people.

As mentioned, individual perception, if we were to look at it collectivly, we would need to gather statistic data presenting peoples opinions, or we can go on and debate for ever in this forum and blender forum what people think..but sure, no smoke without fire they say..perhaps blender is debated more than any other softwares UI? to me it looks like it, but I canīt state that for sure really.

bazsa73
04-28-2016, 11:54 AM
The right click "philosophy" is straight idiotism, I admit. It's like eating a soup with a fork and using the spoon for the steak.

Asticles
04-28-2016, 12:00 PM
Sorry about writing a post without introducing myself. Is there any thread for this?

About the Andrew Price's video. I think it's not going to anywhere by now. I think the blender foundation is aiming to professional studios rather than individuals and they're focusing now on viewport performance, asset management and pipeline enhancement.

Thanks

prometheus
04-28-2016, 12:04 PM
The right click "philosophy" is straight idiotism, I admit. It's like eating a soup with a fork and using the spoon for the steak.

:D:D ...nah, just join in with the philosophy, once you do it often enough it will become second nature, and once that happens you have accepted it and it wonīt be dumb, neither will those others accepting it tell you otherwise, so close your ears to those saying it is idiotic and you will be okay:D and there are probably things you will learn from eating soup with a fork, you will enjoy a longer dinner, and perhaps even give up on the soup eventually..which will help reducing ethe calorie intake...
:D:D

jeric_synergy
04-28-2016, 12:06 PM
Like Jeric. ;)
I live to serve. ;)

......., its just very contrary.
That's an excellent word choice, "contrary". As I said, AFAICT the Blender outliner panel (and boy do I wish LW had something comparable**) COULD use standard selection ALONG WITH the Blender idiosyncratic selection processes. (Just like the Media 100 users COULD have kept, oh, "CMD+K" along WITH "K", but noooooooooo...) But they seem to choose not to, just "because".

People keep defending that every software has its idiosyncracies, and it's true and necessary*, but VERY low-level stuff like multi-select should adhere to conventions or have damn good reasons not to.

Anyway, LW board, let's concentrate on stealing the good bits and avoiding the bad examples.



*to have tools that're better at some tasks than other tools
**I believe the LW Scene Editor does not show all the dependencies in the same manner the Blender Outliner does, but I may be conflating the C4D outline panel with the Blender feature.

prometheus
04-28-2016, 12:46 PM
A good bit from blender when actually talking about copy good things.

I like middle mouse orbit, shift and left mouse to move...I prefer that rather than lightwaves mouse click and rotate.

I reckon they have gone for right mouse to select stuff, left to move and edit, and middle mouse to navigate with complementary shift keys.

Rayek
04-29-2016, 01:04 AM
A good bit from blender when actually talking about copy good things.

I like middle mouse orbit, shift and left mouse to move...I prefer that rather than lightwaves mouse click and rotate.

I reckon they have gone for right mouse to select stuff, left to move and edit, and middle mouse to navigate with complementary shift keys.

I will never understand why it is impossible to pan the view with the middle mouse button in Adobe applications. Not even a configuration setting is available.

3d applications ought to accommodate the same middle mouse button options; pan or orbit with the middle mouse button, and scroll wheel to zoom in and out. At least provide users with an option somewhere hidden in the prefs.

Working with a Wacom tablet or Cintique, it just makes even more sense to offer this option.

Yesterday I discovered, to great rejoicing, that I could map the middle mouse button for panning in OpenToonz - which includes panning the Xsheet, the graph editor, the schematic node view, the viewports, and so on. WHAT A RELIEF!

Asticles
04-29-2016, 01:31 AM
Anyway, you can change the select behaviour in options panel.

133623

safetyman
04-29-2016, 05:24 AM
Prometheus -- I don't mean to attack you, I hope you realize that, just trying to understand your specific issues. Regarding the viewports, I guess since I only use one viewport and never need to switch to a quad view (seems old school to me) it's odd to me that it's a big stumbling block for you. If I need to switch to the left, right, top bottom, etc, push one button. Boom. If I need more than one simultaneous view, which is rarely, I just drag out a new panel and switch to the view I want with 1 click. Anyway, I'm sorry that it's more difficult for you than it should be.

I guess what keeps me coming back to Blender is the community -- if you don't like something, you can change it, even re-write the source code yourself if you want. There are numerous addons out there that address Blender's idiosyncrasies and actually change the way you use the program, if that's important to you.

Try Sensei format (https://blendersensei.com/store#senseiformat), which remaps a lot of the shortcuts, puts buttons in more logical places, consolidates similar tools etc. It's too different for me, but it might make things easier for folks who can't stand the way things are right now.

Fluid Designer (www.microvellum.com/products/fluid-designer/fluid-designer-download/) is almost a total revamp of Blender aimed at interior designers and it's amazing if that's your field. Just an example of what can be done when you need to tailor it to your specific needs.

There are a few addons that I use every day in my job that make life 1000 times better than LW ever did, and I didn't have to shell out $ to use them commercially. I was so excited to see NewTek rolling out Core back in the day, but then they trashed it and I had to rely more and more on Blender to get my work done. I feel that LW is getting left in the dust by other programs and they haven't given us any incentive to sit back and wait, which I can't do if I want to get things accomplished. Not trying to convince anyone of anything, and I'm hopeful that good things are coming soon for LW, but for now I'm more efficient in my Blender workflow.

spherical
04-29-2016, 08:18 AM
That's some pretty cool stuff. Looks like they will make my Blender learning curve a bit less steep. Thanks for the pointers.

prometheus
04-29-2016, 09:23 AM
Prometheus -- I don't mean to attack you, I hope you realize that, just trying to understand your specific issues. Regarding the viewports, I guess since I only use one viewport and never need to switch to a quad view (seems old school to me) it's odd to me that it's a big stumbling block for you. If I need to switch to the left, right, top bottom, etc, push one button. Boom. If I need more than one simultaneous view, which is rarely, I just drag out a new panel and switch to the view I want with 1 click. Anyway, I'm sorry that it's more difficult for you than it should be.
.

Thatīs ok Safety man, I understand that, but we could go in debate wether or not I was specifc or not in those threads and what I pointed to..maybe I wasnīt and maybe I was clear enough, that is what I thought so the statement that I never gave any specific samples ringed a bit out of tune with me..so you have to understand that.

regarding four viewports, if you think about it..why has any software even that possibility? blender has it, lightwave, maya max, cad software etc..if it wasnīt good for anything..I doubt any developer would have bothered..thus it would only be single viewports we could use..but itīs not that way.

And for me, when editing in some ortho view, I need to see the changes in other viewports wich gives me a fuller picture when I can see the shape change in other 3d views instead of one, that is of importance for some accuracy modeling, you may need to select in left viewport to get the proper selection going down a certain axis, then move the element but you need to see it in top view...you can not just go about that with a single viewport even if you can choose whatever view you want from that single view.


I agree with you on many other parts.
By the way..I just found out, you donīt have to set up a four viewport window, there is a toggle quad view in the display menu, just noticed that..and the shortcut is Q ...hower, these viewports are a bit strange, and if you click toggle quad, on and off, it will switch between quad and single view..but if you use the shortcut it is suppose to use, then it will just maximize the window and not switch quad/single views...argghh, maybe the shorcut has been screwed up somehow?

And these viewports seems locked to me in that I can not scale them nor click on any of the viewports to maximize them as with lightwave, sure I might get to understand all those windows someday..but they are unecessary weird to work with for me and always has, with lightwave I just go with the flow and click that little icon to maximize any of the selected viewports...I just donīt get it why it canīt be that simple for blender, that toggle view has fixed viewports. within One window, so setting up several windows is needed and then save out the default for it.I just donīt like that, but sure..it wonīt make me any better at complaining about it instead of finding alternative ways, so I need to have a certain balance between complaining about it and actually doing something about it with workarounds. :)

Thanks for the links will check, and yes, I like how we can design the UI in blender with direct changes, that is what I do not like about the UI in lightwave and the fact that lw windows canīt be scaled fully or docked.
a

prometheus
04-29-2016, 09:55 AM
Anyway, you can change the select behaviour in options panel.

133623


a bit funny, I think I get the point about blender having different button menu or slider types, but estethicly for me I donīt think it looks good or subtle, the round button is for slider values and the others more rectangular is only for active non active checking ..I understand they seem to present functions with different shapes in and colors with the buttons, but to me it getīs to messy, I would rather se them present more uniform buttons..but thatīs me, some may like it..I donīt.

jeric_synergy
04-29-2016, 10:00 AM
I will never understand why it is impossible to pan the view with the middle mouse button in Adobe applications. Not even a configuration setting is available.

3d applications ought to accommodate the same middle mouse button options; pan or orbit with the middle mouse button, and scroll wheel to zoom in and out. At least provide users with an option somewhere hidden in the prefs.
Meh, I loathe that mechanic: I think it's mostly due to my mouse wheel, but I'm fine with Adobe's default "spacebar=hand tool" convention. I just don't like having a button and scoll tool in the same widget. Obviously, YMMV.

DrStrik9
04-29-2016, 10:10 AM
I'm glad you started this thread, Jeric. I began to tackle Blender a couple of months ago, and found that the ONLY way I could move forward at all was to follow many beginner tutorials on YouTube. Blender, for me, was NOT possible to figure out without LOTS of help. The interface seemed SO strange at first that I considered giving up DAILY for a week or so. So on that score, I do feel your "rake-in-the-face" pain.

These are the kindergarten-level Blender tutes that gave me the right push: yes, time-consuming, but valuable (to me) nonetheless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLV7h-WLIx0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zxMd6HbG4k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-grDsMg6_k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tG2wSNCBmE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKarOm3N4Lg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWwPoRiKQxc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyS8eiq14G8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTWZelbAAkA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQUT9sbTX44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mH6UsU6zno
Most of those are done by a guy who seems to know very little about Blender. :+) Perfect.

There are also MANY more advanced tutes on YouTube, the true Blender source of useful info, IMO. There is also http://blender.stackexchange.com/ -- which is run like the military, but which can be very helpful. And of course, there's http://blenderartists.org/forum/index.php -- but if you're a noob like me, they're going to make you feel small and insignificant, which of course I am. :+)

The LW manual is far superior to the Blender manual, IMO, which is quite useless to my way of thinking. But some people swear by it, so each to their own.

Probably the worst thing about B's interface for me was the windows system, which is about as non-intuitive as it gets, but once you figure it out (backwards thinking), it works quite well. It seems to me that "intuitive" can be defined as what you learned first. I really don't mind the three-button mouse thing. It does take some getting used to, but it works.

So I return to my old maxim: "What we do for a living is learn news stuff." :+)

I don't have the other expensive tools a lot of LW users have for fluids, smoke, etc., so playing with these (mostly via tutes so far) in Blender is quite welcome, especially given the price.

--

[EDIT] One more thought: probably my favorite thing about Blender so far is that almost EVERYTHING can be keyframed. In Physics, this is something new to me, and quite powerful, compared to LW's straight-forward Bullet implementation.

My noob tutorial-results page: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSjrSoWanD8-wun0BSToRag

jeric_synergy
04-29-2016, 10:23 AM
I'm glad you started this thread, Jeric.

I endeavor to launch interesting threads, ask interesting questions.

I began to tackle Blender a couple of months ago, and found that the ONLY way I could move forward at all was to follow many beginner tutorials on YouTube. Blender, for me, was NOT possible to figure out without LOTS of help. The interface seemed SO strange at first that I considered giving up DAILY for a week or so. So on that score, I do feel your "rake-in-the-face" pain.

These are the kindergarten-level Blender tutes that gave me the right push: yes, time-consuming, but valuable (to me) nonetheless.
::SNIP::
That's a very useful resource!!! Thanks for "taking the arrows in the back" for us!

The LW manual is far superior to the Blender manual, IMO, which is quite useless to my way of thinking. But some people swear by it, so each to their own.
That's the WIKI based manual, right? I'm with you: it's extremely disjointed. I believe it's probably complete, but it's so jumpy it's a bit useless.

Incidentally, that is EXACTLY why I always wanted my LW-WIKI manual to START with BeeVee's work: without a unifying "hand on the rudder", documentation just becomes a list of features. The WIKI aspect would be users enhancing and correcting entries in a moderated manner.

I don't have the other expensive tools a lot of LW users have for fluids, smoke, etc., so playing with these (mostly via tutes so far) in Blender is quite welcome, especially given the price.
It's the best plugin you don't have to purchase.

bazsa73
04-29-2016, 11:07 AM
So it seems quite a few of us uses Blender on a regular basis. Sorrowful in a sense.

gamedesign1
04-29-2016, 11:07 AM
I hate the little niggly problems with Blender's UI. It just has weird ways of working that doesn't match other software at all. Why change things that work? Blender has so much going for it, but the UI issues stop me from using it regularly. Shame

prometheus
04-29-2016, 11:44 AM
I'm glad you started this thread, Jeric. I began to tackle Blender a couple of months ago, and found that the ONLY way I could move forward at all was to follow many beginner tutorials on YouTube. Blender, for me, was NOT possible to figure out without LOTS of help. The interface seemed SO strange at first that I considered giving up DAILY for a week or so. So on that score, I do feel your "rake-in-the-face" pain.


Probably the worst thing about B's interface for me was the windows system, which is about as non-intuitive as it gets, but once you figure it out (backwards thinking), it works quite well. It seems to me that "intuitive" can be defined as what you learned first. I really don't mind the three-button mouse thing. It does take some getting used to, but it works.

I don't have the other expensive tools a lot of LW users have for fluids, smoke, etc., so playing with these (mostly via tutes so far) in Blender is quite welcome, especially given the price.


yes..watching tutorials may be a must, I happened to come in contact with a youngster who happened to use blender since he canīt afford commercial ones at his age ..without ever having had a job, so we sat down and discussed a bit ..I had some questions on some things I wondered was possible and he showed what could be done and I showed him mine:D

So from that ..and the fact I found out about the skin modifier to use on polylines and edges, then I decided to take another stab ..previously I just fired up tried a few minuts ..but was so put of by not understanding the icons, things all around the place in ways that seems not initiuve to me, I pretty fast closed it after a few minutes..some monts went by..testing it again, but the same thing..closed it after a few minutes...so it wasnīt long ago I decided to be more patient with it ..since I wanted to use that skin modifier mainly and since I saw it could sculpt pretty well, all those things arenīt possible nativly with lightwave so that pushed me to hang on a bit, I think I have reached a level 2 of experience around blender now, at level 3 in my own scale..that would mean I will be quite proefficient with the UI and the main tools, level 4 I should be able to work and do quite a lot, level 5 I should be quite skilled in blender..at leve level 6 and 7 ..itīs starting to go pro :D

I think I am at level 4 with lightwave:D My own scale rating so no one can tell me anything else :)

By the ways fluids liquid and fire smoke, well lightwave hasnīt got any of those natively while blender has that natively, from what Iveīs seen based on own testing and others..blender still seem to have render quality issues, that may be a question of proper quality settings and resolution ofcourse, but what can be seen often has those artifacts, I rather actually use turbulence since that is way more easier to set smoke and fire than adding the color volume scattering in the nodes ..and cycles doesnīt render it as fast as vpr in lightwave handles turbulenceFD..not in my opinion.
Then again blender has some other advantages with using the same forces for physics that also works with fluids, paint weightmaps in the scene and particle emission from weight maps etc, also subframe calculations of particles and a special trail count setting.

Michael

DrStrik9
04-29-2016, 07:05 PM
... Then again blender has some other advantages with using the same forces for physics that also works with fluids, paint weightmaps in the scene and particle emission from weight maps etc, also subframe calculations of particles and a special trail count setting.

I'm still only a beginner (barely scratching Blender's surface), but I do like the way all the physics stuff works perfectly with all the other physics stuff, including rigid-body, soft-body, particles, smoke, liquids, cloth, etc. -- I also am discovering some of the finer points in getting good renders. Cycles only, of course. In the long run, I will continue to use Lightwave, because it's awesome, and I've used it since v.5.2. And LW's renderer is hard to beat.

I can't stress enough how cool it is in Blender to be able to keyframe virtually all physics stuff, from activation (& de-activation) to almost all other parameters.

jeric_synergy
04-30-2016, 12:04 AM
I can't stress enough how cool it is in Blender to be able to keyframe virtually all physics stuff, from activation (& de-activation) to almost all other parameters.
Two things that have always BAFFLED me about LW:
how some things are not keyframe-able-- not a lot but a few, but far more:

WHY EVERYTHING ISN'T EXPOSED IN THE SDK.

I >really< don't get why you would want to hobble those developers who want to make your product more attractive.

jasonwestmas
04-30-2016, 07:14 AM
Two things that have always BAFFLED me about LW:
how some things are not keyframe-able-- not a lot but a few, but far more:

WHY EVERYTHING ISN'T EXPOSED IN THE SDK.

I >really< don't get why you would want to hobble those developers who want to make your product more attractive.


Not to down play the importance of the new lw geometry engine at all.
But the popularity of 3ds max for example came into fruition because of the love of its 3rd party/ SDK (EARLY ON). That's what I think anyway and I believe it is obvious.

erikals
04-30-2016, 08:52 AM
for LightWave plugins to become more powerful, they need a new geometry engine,

so, let's see.

we might actually see 3rdPowers release Modeler tools inside Layout before LWG because of this  http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

lightscape
04-30-2016, 09:44 AM
I hate the little niggly problems with Blender's UI. It just has weird ways of working that doesn't match other software at all. Why change things that work? Blender has so much going for it, but the UI issues stop me from using it regularly. Shame

Maybe when Ton is no longer in charge of blender. My main use for blender are the fluidsims because I'm too cheap to personally buy Realflow :D

http://hitfilm.com/forum/discussion/40155/hitfilm-4-express-is-out-now#latest
So a user kairocks2002 tried blender and thinks it has an "unfriendly UI."

Not an uncommon opinion about blender in MANY forums.

prometheus
04-30-2016, 10:42 AM
this ones going at a bit too fast pace I think, change your youtube playback settings to be slower if you canīt keep up with the pace...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drgcD9YqYUc

erikals
04-30-2016, 11:24 AM
can't i do that with booleans and DP Edge node?

jeric_synergy
04-30-2016, 11:30 AM
can't i do that with booleans and DP Edge node?
Give it a go.

Wickedpup
04-30-2016, 04:23 PM
can't i do that with booleans and DP Edge node?
Can you? :D

erikals
04-30-2016, 04:30 PM
Pretty good?

http://erikalstad.com/cgtemp/DP_Edge_Mechanic.png

prometheus
04-30-2016, 05:37 PM
Pretty good?

http://erikalstad.com/cgtemp/DP_Edge_Mechanic.png

will it hold up for 3d printing or fracturing as a true mesh, or is the booleans straight performed only at rendertime?

erikals
04-30-2016, 10:58 PM
no, like Blender Hard Ops / BoxCutter, this is only at rendertime.


DP Edge

http://dpont.pagesperso-orange.fr/plugins/nodes/images/EdgedCube.jpg


the Blender Hard Ops workflow is quite a lot faster though,
but it can't be compared to more advanced solutions such as C4D Rounding or Modo MeshFusion.

once again, the Blender feature, Hard Ops, is something i feel is one the way to becoming something very cool,
for only to be left in the dust, such as Blender fluids. Blender so often fail to go the extra mile,
hence why i haven't added it  (yet)

Wickedpup
05-01-2016, 12:51 AM
no, like Blender Hard Ops / BoxCutter, this is only at rendertime.

Where did you get that info? :stumped:

jeric_synergy
05-01-2016, 01:11 AM
Isn't Hard Ops from some guy, like DPKit? It's not part of the central Blender distro, so it might escape central feature neglect-death.

erikals
05-01-2016, 05:49 AM
Where did you get that info?
sorry, was i wrong, please explain. ?

(i'd love to be wrong)

i'm talking about the fine edges of course, not the boolean operation. that should go without saying.

Wickedpup
05-01-2016, 09:29 AM
From what I can see in the HardOps videos it is done in the regular viewport in Solid mode (as in not "at rendertime").....so I am a bit confused as to what you are getting at here.

erikals
05-01-2016, 09:50 AM
again >

i'm talking about the fine edges of course, not the boolean operation. that should go without saying.

lightscape
05-01-2016, 10:15 AM
Pretty good?

http://erikalstad.com/cgtemp/DP_Edge_Mechanic.png

Not bad.



Modo hardops.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EvTDOM7K81E

erikals
05-02-2016, 12:52 AM
Blender Render Engine >


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b6_wwKiyFvI&feature=em-uploademail

Asticles
05-02-2016, 01:32 AM
prometheus,

Regarding quad view, it's better to split blender views (the three little bars on the corner) and with ctrl+up and down shortcut you can maximize the view where your mouse pointer is it.

Also it allows to have a non simmetrical viewport design if you need by dragging the borders.

To remove any view you can drag from these lines to the viewport you want to remove or by right clicking on the viewport border and selecting join. You can also split with this little menu.

133681

Regards

allabulle
05-02-2016, 02:12 AM
In Blender, CTRL+ALT+Q switches the view from single view to quad view. There's even a button for that labelled "Toggle Quad View" in the Display tab in the Properties panel ('n') to the right of the view. What's the problem with that? Am I missing something?

safetyman
05-02-2016, 05:36 AM
I have HardOps and I just bought Box Cutter ($2 !). HardOps is not a render-time deal, it's all live in the viewport, most things are editable afterwards (non-destructible, some, not all), and it adds some phenomenal tools and functions like automatic mirroring and object. I haven't played with Box Cutter yet, but I like supporting the folks who are putting this together and it should blow regular boolean functions out of the water.

Edit: Just thought I'd mention -- I think the price is for folks who bought HardOps, it might be $15 for everyone else.

allabulle
05-02-2016, 05:45 AM
Same here. Also bought Asset Management add-on for an equivalent ridiculous price. Now I need time to play properly with them.

This Blender thing complements LightWave beautifully. :)

jeric_synergy
05-02-2016, 08:05 AM
In Blender, CTRL+ALT+Q switches the view from single view to quad view. There's even a button for that labelled "Toggle Quad View" in the Display tab in the Properties panel ('n') to the right of the view. What's the problem with that? Am I missing something?
No, except maybe that the built-in Quad view in Blender is, tmk, a rigid, non-adjustable quad view. But it's there, only a (complicated) keystroke away.

To get the more flexible, stretchy LW-esque view takes a bit more work, as detailed above.

Nobody's going to point out you can have 5 or 6 (etc) windows??

allabulle
05-02-2016, 08:23 AM
I see. Fair enough.

Wickedpup
05-02-2016, 08:27 AM
I have HardOps and I just bought Box Cutter ($2 !). HardOps is not a render-time deal, it's all live in the viewport, most things are editable afterwards (non-destructible, some, not all), and it adds some phenomenal tools and functions like automatic mirroring and object. I haven't played with Box Cutter yet, but I like supporting the folks who are putting this together and it should blow regular boolean functions out of the water.


Thank you! Just what I have been saying....haven`t found any "rendertime" magic in it yet, hence my confusion as to what Erikals is talking about. :stumped:

jeric_synergy
05-02-2016, 10:13 AM
I'm futzing about with Blender.... is it indicative of anything that of the 8-9 workspace presets they ship with, none of them are 'Modeling'?

safetyman
05-02-2016, 10:31 AM
I'm futzing about with Blender.... is it indicative of anything that of the 8-9 workspace presets they ship with, none of them are 'Modeling'?

Are you talking about the drop down at the top? They almost all have a 3D view for modeling. I never mess around with that, just pull out a new window and change it to whatever module you want (UV mapping/sculpting/texture painting/compositing/etc.)

jeric_synergy
05-02-2016, 10:39 AM
These are the kindergarten-level Blender tutes that gave me the right push: yes, time-consuming, but valuable (to me) nonetheless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLV7h-WLIx0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zxMd6HbG4k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-grDsMg6_k
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tG2wSNCBmE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OKarOm3N4Lg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QWwPoRiKQxc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyS8eiq14G8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTWZelbAAkA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQUT9sbTX44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mH6UsU6zno
Most of those are done by a guy who seems to know very little about Blender. :+) Perfect.
As I said before, excellent list, but everybody, feel free to set the speed at 1.25X (at least) right from the get-go: the presenter speaks very deliberately.

Just a reminder that you don't have to wait in real time.

prometheus
05-02-2016, 10:41 AM
prometheus,

Regarding quad view, it's better to split blender views (the three little bars on the corner) and with ctrl+up and down shortcut you can maximize the view where your mouse pointer is it.

Also it allows to have a non simmetrical viewport design if you need by dragging the borders.

To remove any view you can drag from these lines to the viewport you want to remove or by right clicking on the viewport border and selecting join. You can also split with this little menu.

133681

Regards

Thanks I will try again...but I did set up splite views before ..but I thought it was wonky and didnīt work properly, I may ofcourse have done it a bit wrong..but, I donīt think you even should have to set up things like that, it should be built in, but anyway..that isnīt the case..so I have to deal with it and follow your advice for instance.


In Blender, CTRL+ALT+Q switches the view from single view to quad view. There's even a button for that labelled "Toggle Quad View" in the Display tab in the Properties panel ('n') to the right of the view. What's the problem with that? Am I missing something?

I know that..I mentioned the toggle quad view in the display tab, it works to switch with that button, but when hovering over that button, it says my shortcut is "Q" and not ctrl alt Q, and when I hit q, it doesnīt toggle the viewport between single and quad views, it just maximizes a single viewport...so something must have happened with that shortcut, not sure if it was like that upon install ..or if I happened to change it myself somehow, so letīs try the ctrl alt q shortcut..well, nothing happens at all with that.

Anyway..the toggle quad button, sure ..if I use that, a quad view, but still the same issue, I can not resize the viewports..they are static, and I can not click or hover over any of the views and maximize it...that is some of the problem, so that setup simple doesnīt work here, I would have to set up individual viewports manually as asticles mentioned, but I hate the fact that I initally have to set these viewports up by dragging and placing the views as I want, then save out to a startup file, I do not have to do that with lightwave...sure it is flexible, but I do not want to design things like this which I think should be basics..but it obviously isnīt..thus my dislikes of how it initially is designed, the fact that it may be great to have control and design the windows is another thing, but it doesnīt weigh up the fact that it lacks initial setups like this.

For newbies it would take hoops of time to find out how to deal with this, while in lightwave all you need to now is what those maximize icons stand for, click on it, and it works without manually setup of itīs viewports, and you do not have to manually set that up, it works as it should and you can resize the vieports as you want, without redesigning the UI.


Regarding hardops, really sweet...will keep my eye on that.

Must add, I prefer blender middle mouse rotate with a single hand than icon orbit with lightwave or alt rotate in the viewport, since alt rotate doesnīt allow for constant rotation and to complete a full orbit, and it requires two hand operations, and the icon can be a bit of a strain with itīs pin point accuracy to use.

so there you go, both Lightwave and blender has my likes and dislikes regarding navigation and viewports UI.

allabulle
05-02-2016, 10:46 AM
Yes, you're right. Since I seldom use quad view, when in need I just toggle the view to quad and maximize it and it does the trick. For longer modelling sessions I'd definitely set up four views without headers and probably save it as a preset.

jeric_synergy
05-02-2016, 11:01 AM
All in all, I'd say LW wins the viewport contest.

erikals
05-02-2016, 12:20 PM
Thank you! Just what I have been saying....haven`t found any "rendertime" magic in it yet, hence my confusion as to what Erikals is talking about. :stumped:

the fine lines ARE at rendertime. Jeeezzz! !!

Amurrell
05-02-2016, 01:57 PM
As for the interface: I'm sick of everyone complaining about Blender's interface.

So am I. Each application has its own interface that one has to learn, none of them are the same, yet Blender gets a real bad rap in this area. It is nowhere near what the 2.4 version and earlier were like, and 2.5+ was a welcome change that made me start to use it a lot more. Sure it could be better, but as far as interfaces and look and feel, these are purely subjective in nature. There may be some objective faults, but most of the animosity comes from a person's inability to learn, unwillingness to try, or just overall visual distaste of the presentation. Does the tool function well, can one learn to use it, does it get you what you want, then there is no reason to let interface stop you from using that tool.

Amurrell
05-02-2016, 02:01 PM
Isn't Hard Ops from some guy, like DPKit? It's not part of the central Blender distro, so it might escape central feature neglect-death.

No, there is constant development going on and he is asking for more developers to help out if they can. I get weekly if not daily updates on new builds ready to download, and there is always something new added to the tool set or functions.

Amurrell
05-02-2016, 02:09 PM
again >i'm talking about the fine edges of course, not the boolean operation. that should go without saying.

The edges are a bevel modifier applied to actual mesh depending on the type of boolean cuts you make. There is something called c-sharpen and s-sharpen, each one do something slightly different, and you can go back and change the bevel width at will. There is also c-step which allows you to make additional cuts with a different bevel width than the previous setting. Each time you boolean and cut, several steps are being done, such as adding the bevel modifier, and sharpening edges, and so on, things that would take several steps to accomplish. Now there is work being done to make this subdivision friendly. So no, this is not at render time, but actual geometry.

See here https://masterxeon1001.com/2016/02/23/hard-ops-007-intro-guide/
https://masterxeon1001.com/2016/04/17/hard-ops-0079-update/

MichaelT
05-02-2016, 02:24 PM
I have HardOp too, and there is no rendertime magic. You can export the model to LW if you feel like seeing what actually goes on in the model. You can get large polys covering the model. Simply select, and delete the covering polys.. the model is there underneath.

prometheus
05-02-2016, 02:48 PM
The edges are a bevel modifier applied to actual mesh depending on the type of boolean cuts you make. There is something called c-sharpen and s-sharpen, each one do something slightly different, and you can go back and change the bevel width at will. There is also c-step which allows you to make additional cuts with a different bevel width than the previous setting. Each time you boolean and cut, several steps are being done, such as adding the bevel modifier, and sharpening edges, and so on, things that would take several steps to accomplish. Now there is work being done to make this subdivision friendly. So no, this is not at render time, but actual geometry.

See here https://masterxeon1001.com/2016/02/23/hard-ops-007-intro-guide/
https://masterxeon1001.com/2016/04/17/hard-ops-0079-update/

Thatīs what I thought, and that is what I would like it to operate on for modeling purposes where you can print out parts in 3d r in the future slice it up with all the geometry in account, so the rendertime booleans isnīt really something I am willing to invest in ....even if it is free, animated booleans at rendertime is however a different thing

prometheus
05-02-2016, 02:58 PM
Sure it could be better, but as far as interfaces and look and feel, these are purely subjective in nature. There may be some objective faults, but most of the animosity comes from a person's inability to learn, unwillingness to try, or just overall visual distaste of the presentation. Does the tool function well, can one learn to use it, does it get you what you want, then there is no reason to let interface stop you from using that tool.

interface purely subjective? Not sure that is it....but it doesnīt matter, I would go for a diamond instead a pile of **** ..while the scarabea would pick the pile of..you know, and unwillingness to try and inability to learn, that is quite irrellevant to me if the UI is a struggle, a fact that some things are easier to learn than other, and in some cases it depends on a person in other cases it may very well be the cause of how something is constructed vs another construction, the choice of deciding wether an interface should stop you from using it? that I think is highly subjective, and I donīt think one can simply add it up to as if those premises of tool function, or if one can learn to use it or if does it get what you want and if those things are fullfilled, then sum it up as then you have no reason for not learning it...thereīs always a time factor and personal resistence from engaging in to overly complicating things, so generally I donīt think One can say that, itīs ofcourse all about personal endurance and if there simply isnīt any other tool around that can do the same, then you would almost be forced to learn it.

Not sure if these thoughts came out in the right end though :) you did however said ."there may be some objective faults" I would say..there can be a lot of them, not just some..and sure most of the animosity comes from inability to learn or unwillingness, but that frustration is often generated by a software itself ..maybe it isnīt just black and white, it could have something to do with the person learning as well as the software itself simply not
providing a good environment so you can learn it with some degree of ease.

To sum it up..I wouldnīt rule out the any of the possible responsible factor when failure of learning ..it can be the software and it can be the inability to learn from the person, to me it is pretty simple, we as humans have faults, so do the software in the way they are coded and designed, probably because it is designed by humans with faults in the first place..:)

Michael

spherical
05-02-2016, 02:58 PM
There may be some objective faults, but most of the animosity comes from a person's inability to learn, unwillingness to try, or just overall visual distaste of the presentation.

Here's where I'll get into the conversation. I love learning new things. That is one of the foundations of my being and is explicitly stated in my bios. Granted, I'm not the norm. Far from it and happy to be so. However, this broad assumption offends me, as it should others. When I go into Blender and try to learn it, I am continually confounded by the illogicality of its basic nature. It is similar to trying to do a search on some esoteric subject in a search engine, when you don't first know the terms to search on (IOW what the thing is called in the relevant industry). Not knowing what to use as the search term then returns less than or totally useless results. After some minutes to hours of extrapolating in the blind, you begin to narrow the focus because the fuzzy search has successively led you to learn what the thing is called and you search using that. Similar thing happens in Blender. Where one would think to look is quite often completely useless. Off I go to tutorials or blind searches to learn where, or even if, the item I want is available. Frustrating doesn't even scratch the surface; especially when it happens more than once in a session. When I am successful in finding that which I have been wanting to use, WTF? is most often heard echoing through the far reaches of my mind. Yet, I continue to use it because it offers operations that other applications do not; all the while waiting, hoping, for the keystone to finally drop into place completing the learning arch, so that I can grok the application on its terms and use it without heretofore unnecessary interruptions. I've successfully learned some pretty darn complex applications but this one goes right up there in lights. YMMV. Standard Disclaimers Apply. Professional Driver On Closed Course. Do Not Operate Machinery. Do Not Take With Alcohol.

Amurrell
05-02-2016, 04:05 PM
Here's where I'll get into the conversation. I love learning new things. That is one of the foundations of my being and is explicitly stated in my bios. Granted, I'm not the norm. Far from it and happy to be so. However, this broad assumption offends me, as it should others. When I go into Blender and try to learn it, I am continually confounded by the illogicality of its basic nature. It is similar to trying to do a search on some esoteric subject in a search engine, when you don't first know the terms to search on (IOW what the thing is called in the relevant industry). Not knowing what to use as the search term then returns less than or totally useless results. After some minutes to hours of extrapolating in the blind, you begin to narrow the focus because the fuzzy search has successively led you to learn what the thing is called and you search using that. Similar thing happens in Blender. Where one would think to look is quite often completely useless. Off I go to tutorials or blind searches to learn where, or even if, the item I want is available. Frustrating doesn't even scratch the surface; especially when it happens more than once in a session. When I am successful in finding that which I have been wanting to use, WTF? is most often heard echoing through the far reaches of my mind. Yet, I continue to use it because it offers operations that other applications do not; all the while waiting, hoping, for the keystone to finally drop into place completing the learning arch, so that I can grok the application on its terms and use it without heretofore unnecessary interruptions. I've successfully learned some pretty darn complex applications but this one goes right up there in lights. YMMV. Standard Disclaimers Apply. Professional Driver On Closed Course. Do Not Operate Machinery. Do Not Take With Alcohol.

It isn't a broad assumption when the claims that have been made clearly state such things as "I would love to get into Blender for such and such, but I can't get into the interface." 'Illogicality' as you have termed it, is also subjective in nature, since we are not talking in terms of this therefore that, but rather most of the time solutions are offered as, "I think this would work better this way", or "This makes no sense to me.", or "They should do it this way." all are personal opinions, and some of which I am willing to agree with, while others I am not.

My first statement of inability to learn can apply to anything in life. I have an inability to learn certain concepts and if someone calls me out on it, the best thing I could do is be honest with myself and agree, for there is no wrong in doing so.

Second statement of unwillingness to learn, also can apply to anything, and we have all come across things that we opt out of due to perceived difficulty, again nothing to offend there.

Third statement about distaste of presentation is not false either, for I have found apps that seem to assault the eyes, and I just don't want to use them because they make me angry or frustrated for some reason, even if they are easy to use.

All of the above statements when talking of Blender do not apply to everyone, its on a spectrum, and subjective as I have said, for there are plenty of people that can use the crap out of it, and these so called UI limitations and irritations do not seem to hinder them. If they bother you, then fine, they bother you, and many others. Blender is not perfect, but damn if it doesn't have quite a bit of capability, UI be damned, but again, that is my subjective opinion.

prometheus
05-02-2016, 05:02 PM
It isn't a broad assumption when the claims that have been made clearly state such things as "I would love to get into Blender for such and such, but I can't get into the interface." 'Illogicality' as you have termed it, is also subjective in nature, since we are not talking in terms of this therefore that, but rather most of the time solutions are offered as, "I think this would work better this way", or "This makes no sense to me.", or "They should do it this way." all are personal opinions, and some of which I am willing to agree with, while others I am not.

My first statement of inability to learn can apply to anything in life. I have an inability to learn certain concepts and if someone calls me out on it, the best thing I could do is be honest with myself and agree, for there is no wrong in doing so.

Second statement of unwillingness to learn, also can apply to anything, and we have all come across things that we opt out of due to perceived difficulty, again nothing to offend there.

Third statement about distaste of presentation is not false either, for I have found apps that seem to assault the eyes, and I just don't want to use them because they make me angry or frustrated for some reason, even if they are easy to use.

All of the above statements when talking of Blender do not apply to everyone, its on a spectrum, and subjective as I have said, for there are plenty of people that can use the crap out of it, and these so called UI limitations and irritations do not seem to hinder them. If they bother you, then fine, they bother you, and many others. Blender is not perfect, but damn if it doesn't have quite a bit of capability, UI be damned, but again, that is my subjective opinion.

I might sound a little obtuse or having the hickups here, if we discuss the matter of UI limitations do not seem to hinder them, itīs probably little to do with the UI and more about the extreme tolerance some people can employ when learning hard to learn software, so in that regards ..and if the software in fact reaches up to a level of definable "hard to learn" ..like houdini vs lightwave as an example, thought that may also be subjective depending on personal reference..duh.

If we say.."blender is not perfect, but damn it has quite a bit of capability" that says not much about how well or poorly it was designed for most newbies or other 3d artists to learn, it just verifies the fact that ..if you overcome it, you can do magic with it..as with houdini, but these factors do not put the software itself up on a high piedestal like...."itīs just about subjectivity and your willigness to learn, thereīs nothing hard with it".... it does however put the software up on the piedestal in terms of .."if you want to learn it, itīs all up to you, and have tolerance"...but I donīt see the relation between the fact that you can overcome the obstacles and the very fact that it may be hard to learn or not ..depending on both the software and the user ofcourse.
I do not see the connection either about itīs capability of what it can perform otherwise..with that of the (for many)quirky UI design, so if one is trying to justify a bad UI ..or maybe a difficult learning process and then discussing what it really can do in the end..that I do not see as relevant for the actual UI design discussion.

Again..I beg you pardon for letters getting lost in my writings, sometimes itīs sloppy english, and the fact I write very fast on my keyboard, and sometimes it is due to my keyboard is dying, I have to apologize all the time now about that, got to get me a new one soon.:o

what is subjective is always in debate for subjective judgement :) in blenders case ..I do not see that using it is a matter of subjectivity, you canīt put a monkey in front of it and make the monkey learn it...well maybe a monkey can be trained to add the monkey object in blender :) but doing advanced modeling etc, well..it takes some level of intelligence to learn things, the more advanced...you got to have more skills and higher IQ ..right, if it was so simple to work on a very subjective range, it should work for a huge range of people.

DrStrik9
05-02-2016, 06:38 PM
As I said before, excellent list, but everybody, feel free to set the speed at 1.25X (at least) right from the get-go: the presenter speaks very deliberately.

Just a reminder that you don't have to wait in real time.

Agreed, except for idiots like me. :+)

jeric_synergy
05-02-2016, 09:53 PM
..... can one learn to use it, .....
That's pretty much the whole point of the objections. People feel the syntax of the user interactions is so foreign that they'd rather not put themselves thru that pain.

The same deal as people getting worked up about differences between Macs and Windows GUI.

erikals
05-03-2016, 12:50 AM
Sorry, looks like i was wrong somehow...

if this is what i think it is, it opens up huge possibilities.

http://blenderlounge.fr/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/2015-12-03_00-33-25.jpg


crossing fingers they will develop this to become something better than MeshFusion.

still believe there is an at rendertime function going on (realtime normalmap) inside Blender.
(again, on the fine detail) not sure why they did that.
but it really doesn't matter as i can export the mesh. Neat.
edit: ok, got it, the realtime normalmap function serves as a visual representation in OpenGL to simplify the HardOps process on the fine lines/detail.
makes sense now. it's done to avoid making the mesh end up as a complex mess at edit time. it's strange, as it doesn't apply to all functions, then again, no Blender guy, so can't tell how it works 100%. bit tired of looking into it.

i might get this plugin, if it can be applied to imported low-res LightWave meshes.

safetyman
05-03-2016, 06:15 AM
Ok so, some folks like the interface and some hate it. Big hairy deal. Some say the UI likeability/usability is subjective, some say it's not. Big hairy deal.

How about we move on from this useless discussion since all the complaints/suggestions won't get the interface/UI updated any quicker (and LW is no different in this regard). I'd like to suggest something that keeps me coming back to this community even though LW isn't my main tool anymore -- the helpfulness of the wonderful folks who frequent these forums.

Here's my suggestion: Consider Blender to be a plugin for LW and ask questions about how to use it or to try and clear up any confusion. There are plenty of folks here who use it and can help... if doing so here is inappropriate, head over to http://blenderartists.org/forum/index.php and ask questions there. They are just as helpful there, and they don't usually trash other software for being different; they, in fact, discourage "this vs that" software discussions.

If you have no interest, fine, but plenty of folks in this thread seem to have passionate feelings about Blender or are at least intrigued enough to want to know more. I'm offering to help in that regard, because I think the disconnect is not that Blender's UI is from an alien planet, but that it's just from a foreign country, so to speak, from what most folks are used to. I'm no expert, but if I can't provide an answer someone more capable can and will be glad to do so.

I hear a fair amount of folks saying, "well I'd like to learn Blender, but that interface/UI makes me crazy". I felt the same way about LW at first, but I sought out folks who used it alot and I found tutorials that helped me get through it. In other words, I didn't let my own limitations dissuade me from my goal of leaning a new, wonderful tool. The thing is, complaining about it and saying how much better one program is over another doesn't do anyone any good. Let's help each other instead like we do with everything else.

I'm not advocating everyone drop LW and learn Blender; far from it. I'm just putting out a suggestion on how we can all share the years of knowledge that we've worked hard to achieve.

MichaelT
05-03-2016, 06:40 AM
I have only one immediate complaint when it comes to HardOP and exporting.. I wish they could clean up the model before export, so I would not have to waste time deleting junk.
On LW side of things.. I of course wish this (HardOp) functionality was in Lightwave to begin with.

prometheus
05-03-2016, 08:20 AM
Ok so, some folks like the interface and some hate it. Big hairy deal. Some say the UI likeability/usability is subjective, some say it's not. Big hairy deal.

How about we move on from this useless discussion since all the complaints/suggestions won't get the interface/UI updated any quicker (and LW is no different in this regard). I'd like to suggest something that keeps me coming back to this community even though LW isn't my main tool anymore -- the helpfulness of the wonderful folks who frequent these forums.

Here's my suggestion: Consider Blender to be a plugin for LW and ask questions about how to use it or to try and clear up any confusion. There are plenty of folks here who use it and can help... if doing so here is inappropriate, head over to http://blenderartists.org/forum/index.php and ask questions there. They are just as helpful there, and they don't usually trash other software for being different; they, in fact, discourage "this vs that" software discussions.

If you have no interest, fine, but plenty of folks in this thread seem to have passionate feelings about Blender or are at least intrigued enough to want to know more. I'm offering to help in that regard, because I think the disconnect is not that Blender's UI is from an alien planet, but that it's just from a foreign country, so to speak, from what most folks are used to. I'm no expert, but if I can't provide an answer someone more capable can and will be glad to do so.

I hear a fair amount of folks saying, "well I'd like to learn Blender, but that interface/UI makes me crazy". I felt the same way about LW at first, but I sought out folks who used it alot and I found tutorials that helped me get through it. In other words, I didn't let my own limitations dissuade me from my goal of leaning a new, wonderful tool. The thing is, complaining about it and saying how much better one program is over another doesn't do anyone any good. Let's help each other instead like we do with everything else.

I'm not advocating everyone drop LW and learn Blender; far from it. I'm just putting out a suggestion on how we can all share the years of knowledge that we've worked hard to achieve.

I can agree with most of what you say here...but there will always popup questions or annoying grunts on why this and why that...as long the problem is there for someone, you can jump over the obstacle in the looping track so to speak, and fine, then you get past it..but it will still be there the next loop once you get there again, unless you complainn about the design of the track..or point it out the the arranging staff.
But sure..it may be wise to try and figure out what shoes to run with, or how to deal with the running, and minimize the annoyance.

Now should we all install the free truespace now? and try and get past itīs UI..Im sure it had some nice things that can be done with it:D I know how to do a macro extrude along a spline macro, an feature not available in neither lightwave or blender..I can help with that
:D

safetyman
05-03-2016, 09:19 AM
Now should we all install the free truespace now? and try and get past itīs UI..Im sure it had some nice things that can be done with it:D I know how to do a macro extrude along a spline macro, an feature not available in neither lightwave or blender..I can help with that :D

If that's your desire, but the discussion isn't about truespace (which is a program I have fond memories of), so you sort of missed the point. No one is arguing about truespace being a program they'd like to learn, but can't get past the UI.

Oh, well. I tried.

prometheus
05-03-2016, 10:00 AM
If that's your desire, but the discussion isn't about truespace (which is a program I have fond memories of), so you sort of missed the point. No one is arguing about truespace being a program they'd like to learn, but can't get past the UI.

Oh, well. I tried.

No safetyman..you are missing the point :)
itīs just as useless discussion as the blender UI discussion, I wasnīt bringing up truspeace for a discussion of truespace, just a sort of ironic hint that itīs UI was in my experience quite cluttered wich icons, and so why do we not use truespace and overcome the obstacle, it was a reference to we can not avoid discussions and whinings about a softwares UI, truespace itself...that is quite irrellevant, I could discuss truespace UI, but I wonīt..it was just a reference with a little irony that you mentioned we should overcome obstacles with blender and help out where needed etc...and I just thought, hey letīs go truespace, and I am sure many folks wouldnīt like to do that...and itīs definitly not my desire to do so, one thing was the UI, the other itīs development, and a third..there seem to be better alternatives out there.

Oh well...we are of different breeds here and there on how to discuss things, I am also a poor misunderstood guy :)

And to confuse it even more..I do not think the blender UI discussion is useless, it may be tiresome to read same things over and over again...but I wouldnīt say it is useless just because of that.

MichaelT
05-03-2016, 10:21 AM
Oh god.. truespace... please don't drag that corpse up from the grave :)

prometheus
05-03-2016, 10:47 AM
Oh god.. truespace... please don't drag that corpse up from the grave :)

Why not..haha:D:devil:
itīs just a matter of overcoming the UI...Not.
to be fair, you could mention it in the same spirit as the discussion of UI between blender and truespace is just the same and useless as discussion, but then again I do not think it is useless, I was just mention that since the reference frame on how it is discussed may be equally useless or useful.

But then again blender is still under constant development, and truespace is not, so therefore it makes more sense to discuss more about blender UI,(may be contradicting myself here) for those of us who do not think it is useless to discuss about that is.

corpse from the grave? that is a trend nowadays, just like zombies.:D
I reckon I will not bother by opening truespace up, had it installed before, but unless there is someting new going on in developent, I rather not..so I am not going in to any deeper discussion about that either..so what is said about that is probably enough.

What can be useful as discussion in my opinion is .... if, how and in such case where the discussion about the blender UI can do some good, if it can that is.
It is probably best served in the blender forums in a decent way..with suggestions or reference to how other software does it, I do not see anything wrong with that, the developers can choose to ignore and follow their own philosphy, or take a note and where it make sense, make a change based on what users have contributed with etc.

I reckon that folks in the blender forum would be so tired about the UI whining, but itīs up that community to accept it as something that seems to trouble people or as whining and unwillingness to learn, I am not sure it can be seen as a case of empires new clothes where the blender users fails to see the obvious.

Rayek
05-03-2016, 11:44 AM
Box cutter looks interesting as well.

http://i.imgur.com/SiVNqra.gifv

Rayek
05-03-2016, 11:57 AM
Another thing useful for people coming from Maya or Max: Blender has built-in interaction presets for Maya and Max. Easily accessible via the splash screen, and interaction schemes make the transition far easier for those users. No need to restart, just change the setting, and off you go.

Mouse interaction, keyboard shortcuts... a Maya or Max user will find it far easier to make the transition. This also makes it easier to integrate Blender in a Maya or Max pipeline.

I know of no other 3d application which is THAT accommodating to users of other 3d software.

Someone ought to make one for Lightwave users.


Two more things: I wish Lightwave had a popup search box for functions, just like Blender. That is so handy at times. Type the command you want, and execute it. And could we please have an option to dusplay and configure pie menus?

Say what you want about Blender, but Lightwave's interaction configuration options pale in comparison - what you see, is what you get. No additional interaction possibilities are given. Often this can lead to frustration.

Examples:
In Blender the scroll wheel can be used to zoom in and out. In Layout it switches between positioning and rotation. I'd like to change that behaviour to zoom in and out. And pan the view with the middle mouse button.

Can't do it.

Worse, when I do zoom in, Layout zooms into the center of the screen. In Blender and other apps I am used to zooming into a specific area or object of interest.

Can't do it in Lightwave. First zoom in, than pan. Or vice versa. Sure. we can frame selected objects, but I just want to be able to zoom into an area of interest - whether selected or not, whether it contains an object or not.

Just can't do it. I suppose switching to a camera view is required to get more freedom with this, but I still have to switch continuously between two modes of control with the mouse wheel. In Blender the controls for the perspective view and a camera view are the same when I lock the camera to the view.

Sometimes I'd like to switch from free orbiting to orbiting around selected objects only. Can't do it in Layout.

Sorry, I am in a bit of a crappy mood, because I had to do some work in Layout today (after months of not touching it), and these things throw me off every single time I load it up.

Why is it STILL not possible to change such basic things as using the scroll wheel for zooming in and out in Layout?

Oh, and when is the undo system going to be fixed? I dropped in objects from explorer into Layout, and "obviously" it will not let me undo that step (I dropped in the wrong one).

Sigh. Blender has its GUI quirks, but at least I configure the heck out of it, and make it my own. Lightwave? Not so much, I am afraid.

tischbein3
05-03-2016, 12:04 PM
i might get this plugin, if it can be applied to imported low-res LightWave meshes.
Just a word of warning:
Not sure if this plugin will help you, since you still feel uncomfortable with blender modeling.
Most of its functionality is a shortcut for things you have to learn anyway.
But hey, maybe I'm wrong and this is your personal entry point to learn it...
But looking back, I have to say that blender modeling is pretty hard to crush for beginners,
since beside the UI, you have to relearn a lot, and ignore some habits you have aquired in LW.

Wickedpup
05-03-2016, 12:18 PM
Another thing useful for people coming from Maya or Max: Blender has built-in interaction presets for Maya and Max. Easily accessible via the splash screen, and interaction schemes make the transition far easier for those users. No need to restart, just change the setting, and off you go.

Mouse interaction, keyboard shortcuts... a Maya or Max user will find it far easier to make the transition.

I know of no other 3d application THAT accommodating.

Someone ought to make one for Lightwave users.
In Modo you have remapping presets for Max, 2 for Maya (one for navigation only) , Cinema4D, Lightwave,XSI and Silo.....they probably should make one for Blender :D

prometheus
05-03-2016, 12:45 PM
Just a word of warning:
Not sure if this plugin will help you, since you still feel uncomfortable with blender modeling.
Most of its functionality is a shortcut for things you have to learn anyway.
But hey, maybe I'm wrong and this is your personal entry point to learn it...
But looking back, I have to say that blender modeling is pretty hard to crush for beginners,
since beside the UI, you have to relearn a lot, and ignore some habits you have aquired in LW.

That is probably of no big deal, what is interesting in the first place that would probably be how the hard ops work and adds son speed and functionality in the first place..and leverages other standard modeling performances that erikals may simply just do as well in lightwave, if that is the case..then it should be no big deal to adjust to a different workflow..once you get past the initial UI differences, and some modeling differences, but ofcourse, I canīt speak for erikals...just guessing :)

yes relearn, there are however so many things that are common in the 3d world, though it may be named differently and live in the application in a different level.

One have get used to how blender treats object mode and edit mode, in lightwave thereīs no such thing as I know of..so with blender if you apply subdiv modifiers in edit mode, it will not affect it as you expect..so care has to be taken to understand and work in the right mode, and for sculpting you canīt sculpt in object mode or in edit mode, you have to enter sculpting mode, when working with lightwave that may be no problem at all ..and in some cases you can work faster...on the other hand, blender offers the modifiers to move up an down in the stack, toggle them on and off, or remove etc.

Michael

erikals
05-03-2016, 02:05 PM
Can't do it in Lightwave. First zoom in, than pan. Or vice versa. Sure. we can frame selected objects,
but I just want to be able to zoom into an area of interest - whether selected or not, whether it contains an object or not.
yep, this can be quite challenging when doing CA related stuff... we really should have a AOI Zoom, or Focus Zoom as i call it.
in this example, "luckily" the hand is filled with nulls. if it wasn't, a Focus Zoom would be quite difficult.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4VJxLPMTfc

erikals
05-03-2016, 03:13 PM
yes, if i do go the HardOps route, i'll make the base mesh in LightWave first, then add detail in Blender.

i guess i can import a base mesh in Blender for then to apply HardOps, right ? ...i hope   http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

MetaMesh + HardOps seems to fix some Rounding challenges in LightWave, but dang, Modeler improvements seem to take forever.
...won't be long before users start looking elsewhere unless LWG stops neglecting the Modeler.

i don't envy them though, as Modeler needs a rewrite and they haven't got a Modeler coder.


to many Modeler was once what made LightWave great, now it's just... ... ... waiting.

Wickedpup
05-03-2016, 05:03 PM
And since I mentioned Modo...... http://community.thefoundry.co.uk/discussion/topic.aspx?f=3&t=122339&page=0

safetyman
05-04-2016, 05:11 AM
yes, if i do go the HardOps route, i'll make the base mesh in LightWave first, then add detail in Blender.

i guess i can import a base mesh in Blender for then to apply HardOps, right ? ...i hope   http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

Blender has a .lwo import capability right out of the box... I use it all the time. It will even automatically add a sub-d modifier if you have sub-d's on the LW model.

lightscape
05-04-2016, 06:13 AM
Examples:
In Blender the scroll wheel can be used to zoom in and out. In Layout it switches between positioning and rotation. I'd like to change that behaviour to zoom in and out. And pan the view with the middle mouse button.

Can't do it.


It only takes autohotkeys. Been using maya style navigation in lightwave since time immemorial.

MichaelT
05-04-2016, 07:05 AM
Autohotkey is one way.. but don't play games while it is running. Some will ban you for having it. Like punkbuster.

jwiede
05-04-2016, 12:09 PM
Autohotkey is one way.. but don't play games while it is running. Some will ban you for having it. Like punkbuster.

See! Using AHK offers even greater benefits!

Rayek
05-04-2016, 12:19 PM
It only takes autohotkeys. Been using maya style navigation in lightwave since time immemorial.

"Only". Such a simple word. Relying on Autohotkeys is not a viable general solution for these reasons:
1) it is unavailable for Mac;
2) relying on a third-party tool to change Lightwave's core navigation/interaction scheme is a fragile workflow: when I move to a different location I may not have access to that tool;
3) Autohotkeys is yet another script language to learn. Not quite accessible for most users.

Just not an elegant solution at all. I wish the LW dev team would just start to realize that Lightwave is a very small fish in the pond nowadays, and NOT allowing for different interaction schemes is plainly hurting their software. Blender and Modo developers seem to realize this very well.

jwiede
05-04-2016, 05:19 PM
I wish the LW dev team would just start to realize that Lightwave is a very small fish in the pond nowadays, and NOT allowing for different interaction schemes is plainly hurting their software.

"Allowing" suggests they could easily change it if they wanted, but given we've been told certain behaviors are quite hard-coded (f.e. mouse behaviors), seems more likely they actually cannot easily make those behaviors user-configurable. Like many GUI-related improvements, such reconfigurability likely has to wait for The Big GUI Engine Refit(tm).

MichaelT
05-04-2016, 05:28 PM
Instead of working ourselves up.. let's see what 2016 brings to the table :) My initial hope is for the new platform to be in place, so changes can be more easily implemented. Because its like with modo really, their nexus platform have allowed them to do just that.

jwiede
05-04-2016, 05:44 PM
Instead of working ourselves up.. let's see what 2016 brings to the table :) My initial hope is for the new platform to be in place, so changes can be more easily implemented. Because its like with modo really, their nexus platform have allowed them to do just that.

LW3DG has already stated that "LW Next"/"LW 2016"/whatever will not contain the long-awaited "Big GUI Engine Refit(tm)", nor any significant improvements to GUI configurability. GUI is basically same as before. The question was asked and answered in the post discussion thread associated with the Modifier Stack post, IIRC, because that was the first post that showed any of LW's GUI.

MichaelT
05-04-2016, 06:18 PM
I understood as much (Regarding UI being the same) however, from what I remember they said the platform would be in place (at least in larger parts) and that this would allow them to begin working through a common platform, rather than this separation. Internally speaking. But maybe I misunderstood?
They can call it whatever they like, as long as they release it sooner, rather than later ;)

lightscape
05-04-2016, 07:53 PM
"Only". Such a simple word. Relying on Autohotkeys is not a viable general solution for these reasons:
1) it is unavailable for Mac;
2) relying on a third-party tool to change Lightwave's core navigation/interaction scheme is a fragile workflow: when I move to a different location I may not have access to that tool;
3) Autohotkeys is yet another script language to learn. Not quite accessible for most users.

Just not an elegant solution at all. I wish the LW dev team would just start to realize that Lightwave is a very small fish in the pond nowadays, and NOT allowing for different interaction schemes is plainly hurting their software. Blender and Modo developers seem to realize this very well.

I'm sorry you're using a mac for work. :D
Lightwave 2015 has an option to zoom in zoom out with mouse scroll. Which version of lw are you in?

Rayek
05-04-2016, 10:45 PM
I'm sorry you're using a mac for work. :D
Lightwave 2015 has an option to zoom in zoom out with mouse scroll. Which version of lw are you in?

...for Modeler only. I predominantly use Layout nowadays. This is exactly why having two separate parts to maintain is having a negative impact on LW's development: support for zooming with the scroll wheel must be added TWICE by the developers: in Modeler and in Layout. And the zooming behaviour in both apps reacts differently.

Perhaps in 2016?

jeric_synergy
05-04-2016, 11:57 PM
You're right that users shouldn't have to learn a whole 'nother scripting language, but AHK is a pretty sweet force multiplier for almost all programs. Reminds me of AREXX, almost.

BUT, when one is discussing general principles, specific and picky solutions are not the point. :beerchug:

MichaelT
05-05-2016, 01:56 AM
You're right that users shouldn't have to learn a whole 'nother scripting language, but AHK is a pretty sweet force multiplier for almost all programs. Reminds me of AREXX, almost.

BUT, when one is discussing general principles, specific and picky solutions are not the point. :beerchug:

AREXX?? Then you're around my age ;)

erikals
05-05-2016, 01:57 AM
i just thought about the Arexx system yesterday... http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

Wickedpup
05-05-2016, 03:23 AM
Speaking of AHK, has anyone tried this with LW? https://www.highrez.co.uk/downloads/xmousebuttoncontrol.htm
I believe Tor Frick uses it with Modo.....

jwiede
05-05-2016, 03:32 AM
i just thought about the Arexx system yesterday... http://erikalstad.com/backup/misc.php_files/smile.gif

Question: When you think about AREXX, is it with or without Wshell? I've found people often remember AREXX attributes fondly, only for many of them to be lauding Wshell features, not AREXX.

One of the things that really drew me to MacOS (even before OSX) was AppleScript, which always felt very AREXX-like to me. What's really odd, though, is that Windows WSH _could_ easily similar functionality, but for some odd reason, very few of the scripting language authors bother to add clean, direct IPC mechanisms for driving apps in scripts. OpenObjectREXX is actually a really nice REXX implementation, but while it has a viable IPC integration for driving other apps, it isn't nearly as "clean" as that of AREXX, or even AppleScript.

Of course, to be fair, a LOT of AREXX's perceived "power" wasn't from AREXX itself, but instead the extensive exposure of app-internal functionality in many Amiga apps. For example, VLT was an excellent terminal emulator, but what really made it powerful was that (unlike similar PC apps), instead of focusing on a rich internal scripting language, it exposed and ceded all that scripting functionality out to AREXX. Apple always had excellent traction at getting devs to make their apps expose rich AppleScript interfaces, which was another big part of what made AppleScript on MacOS so AREXX-like.

Unfortunately, while AppleScript is still quite powerful, modern security restrictions have really done a number on those kinds of open cross-app IPC, so while AppleScript is still present in OSX 10.11, using it to drive other apps is fraught with security issues difficult to simply resolve (from a UX perspective). Essentially the exact same properties that made AREXX (and AppleScript) so versatile and powerful now allow internet malware to casually wreak havoc on a user's applications, data and so forth.

AREXX and AppleScript were great for their time, but that was a simpler time, with fewer security threats. Designers are slowly learning how to do similar things in secure environments, but I question whether it's reasonable to ever again expect that same kind of open, clean power they offered back then.

jeric_synergy
05-05-2016, 09:28 AM
AREXX?? Then you're around my age ;)
I'm the age of that dinosaur killing asteroid. :cry:

jeric_synergy
05-05-2016, 09:33 AM
Of course, to be fair, a LOT of AREXX's perceived "power" wasn't from AREXX itself, but instead the extensive exposure of app-internal functionality in many Amiga apps. For example, VLT was an excellent terminal emulator, but what really made it powerful was that (unlike similar PC apps), instead of focusing on a rich internal scripting language, it exposed and ceded all that scripting functionality out to AREXX. Apple always had excellent traction at getting devs to make their apps expose rich AppleScript interfaces, which was another big part of what made AppleScript on MacOS so AREXX-like.
That part. For me, what made AREXX desirable was, well, the easy syntax didn't hurt, but the ability to tie together apps from disparate vendors was so singular in my experience.... a game changer.

I'd love to script MORE, but lscript inevitably seems to throw up barriers, and Python isn't getting any traction in my mind (and I'm not sure it's got any more capability than lscript, although it seems to have more options at getting at the SDK). The brain cells that learn new languages may have expired.

MichaelT
05-05-2016, 09:58 AM
That part. For me, what made AREXX desirable was, well, the easy syntax didn't hurt, but the ability to tie together apps from disparate vendors was so singular in my experience.... a game changer.

I'd love to script MORE, but lscript inevitably seems to throw up barriers, and Python isn't getting any traction in my mind (and I'm not sure it's got any more capability than lscript, although it seems to have more options at getting at the SDK). The brain cells that learn new languages may have expired.

:) The brain cells are about the only part of your body that doesn't age. A common misconception actually. In fact they even do renew, as does pathways. But like any other muscle.. use it or loose it..

jwiede
05-05-2016, 12:17 PM
I'd love to script MORE, but lscript inevitably seems to throw up barriers, and Python isn't getting any traction in my mind (and I'm not sure it's got any more capability than lscript, although it seems to have more options at getting at the SDK). The brain cells that learn new languages may have expired.

Well, in all fairness, the way LW uses Python, it might as well be idiomatic C/C++. LW3DG needs to study how TF and MAXON both progressed from C/C++ APIs to 1st Gen "C/C++-ic" Python APIs to their current, much more "Pythonic" API bindings. LW3DG need to similarly go back and reimplement their initial (C/C++-ic) Python bindings with much more "Pythonic" APIs (closer to idiomatic Python). Until they do so, working with LW's Python bindings will always be this odd mishmash of generally Pythonic code (incl. libs) doing gyrations to work with and satisfy the LW API's C/C++ idioms.

MichaelT
05-05-2016, 12:29 PM
I will look into developing plugins once the new version comes out... not before. Primarily I want to see if the new platform is available, and usable. Otherwise it will be a waste of time and effort. Because I'd hate to develop something, that will immediately break the next version.

jeric_synergy
05-05-2016, 12:30 PM
Well, in all fairness, the way LW uses Python, it might as well be idiomatic C/C++.
I'm not sure the LWG scripting guy GETS how hard it is for even motivated users. He may have been a programmer too long.

I purchased the RR tutes on using Python, and there's just a ton of stuff that seems fairly arbitrary in the scripting interface. Certainly the support in Unity for C#, and the exemplary dox for same, make a sharp contrast. VERY sharp.

dballesg
05-05-2016, 12:35 PM
LW3DG needs to study how TF and MAXON both progressed from C/C++ APIs to 1st Gen "C/C++-ic" Python APIs to their current, much more "Pythonic" API bindings.

I don't know where you get your info, but TF (don't know MAXON) Python Api is almost a 100% translation of the C++ SDK.
I can tell you a few places where it lacks on that translation, for example the textHints (or textValue hints, they do not have easy names to remember) used to create lists of strings for channel values.
You can't do channel modifiers in Python (nodes) either.
It's not so difficult to do both of those on Modo's C++ SDK, on Modo's Python API is totally impossible.

If by Pythonic you mean their TD SDK, it's a wrapper on top of the Python API with a bit of sugar coat on top. And i'ts not complete yet, but I'm fuzzy on what parts are missing.

If LW Group is going to do something new about Python, better have alook to Blender Python API than TF.

Cheers,
David

jwiede
05-05-2016, 01:21 PM
I don't know where you get your info, but TF (don't know MAXON) Python Api is almost a 100% translation of the C++ SDK.

That was implicit to my point: Looking at how TF migrated APIs from their original Python API (idiomatic C/C++) to their newer "TD" (more Pythonic) API will be beneficial to LW3DG, because LW3DG would benefit from a similar migration (from their existing, idiomatic C/C++-based, Python SDK APIs to a more "Pythonic" set of Python SDK APIs). Had TF not started from such an "idiomatically C/C++-based" set of Python SDK APIs, their experience migrating APIs to the newer "TD" Python SDK APIs would be much less useful to LW3DG.

prometheus
05-06-2016, 02:22 PM
Should have installed this..the screencast keys addon for blender which showcase which shortcuts is used when working in blender, so itīs great when recording tutorials.
I should have installed it and used it on my lightwave-blender skin modifier threads, will have to do some new recordings with something on that.

It seems it previously shipped with blender installation..but you now have to install it manually, so here is the link to the python script, right click and save it, then go to preferences and install the file manually, do not forget to check it with the small little activate button too, you also have to go to display tab/screencast keys.. and click on start display.

Hereīs the vid...


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


hereīs the python addon...
https://svn.blender.org/svnroot/bf-extensions/trunk/py/scripts/addons/space_view3d_screencast_keys.py

I also jut know noticed the ambient occlusion in the matcaps..that is nice too.